Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

Page for discussing mergers and deletions of templates From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More information V, Dec ...
XFD backlog
V Dec Jan Feb Mar Total
CfD 0 0 88 91 179
TfD 0 0 0 0 0
MfD 0 0 0 5 5
FfD 0 2 5 30 37
RfD 0 0 0 90 90
AfD 0 0 0 0 0
Close

On this page, the deletion or merging of templates and modules, with a few exceptions, is discussed.

How to use this page

What not to propose for discussion here

Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in the template namespace and module namespace should be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

Stub templates
Stub templates and categories should be listed at Categories for discussion, as these templates are merely containers for their categories, unless the stub template does not come with a category and is being nominated by itself.
Userboxes
Userboxes should be listed at Miscellany for deletion, regardless of the namespace in which they reside.
Speedy deletion candidates
If the template clearly satisfies a criterion for speedy deletion, tag it with a speedy deletion template. For example, if you wrote the template and request its deletion, tag it with {{Db-author}}. See also WP:T5.
Policy or guideline templates
Templates that are associated with particular Wikipedia policies or guidelines, such as the speedy deletion templates, cannot be listed at TfD separately. They should be discussed on the talk page of the relevant policy or guideline.
Template redirects
List all redirects at Redirects for discussion.
Moving and renaming a template
Use Requested moves.

Reasons to delete a template

Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of the template namespace guidelines, and can't be altered to be in compliance.
  2. The template is redundant to a better-designed template.
  3. The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used.
  4. The template violates a policy such as Neutral point of view or Civility and it can't be fixed through normal editing.

Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing. Instead, you should edit the template to fix its problems. If the template is complex and you don't know how to fix it, WikiProject Templates may be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted by consensus here. If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion. Initiate a discussion on the template talk page if the correct use itself is under debate.

Listing a template

Shortcuts

To list a template for deletion or merging, follow the three-step process below. Do not include the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps.

If you have never nominated a template for deletion or used Twinkle before, you might want to do it manually to avoid making mistakes. For more experienced editors, using Twinkle is recommended, as it automates some of these steps. (After navigating to the template you want to nominate, click its dropdown menu in the top right of the page: TW , and then select "XFD".)

More information Step, Instructions ...
Step Instructions
Step 1

Tag the template

 Paste one of the following notices to the top of the template page:

Note:

  • If the template is protected, request that the TfD notice be added on the template's talk page using the {{editprotected}} template, to catch the attention of administrators or template editors.
  • If the template is designed to be substituted, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template. Example: <noinclude>{{subst:Tfd}}</noinclude>
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion/merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
  • Before saving your edit, preview the page to ensure the TfD notice is displayed properly.
Multiple templates
If you are nominating multiple templates, choose a meaningful title for the discussion (like "American films by decade templates"). Tag every template with {{subst:Tfd|heading=discussion title}} or {{subst:Tfm|name of other template|heading=discussion title}} instead of the versions given above, replacing discussion title with the title you chose (but still not changing the PAGENAME code).
Related categories
If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, paste {{Catfd|template name}} to the top of any categories that could be deleted as a result of the TfD, replacing template name with the name of the nominated template. (If you instead nominated multiple templates, use the meaningful title you chose earlier: {{Catfd|header=title of nomination}}.)
TemplateStyles pages
If you are nominating TemplateStyles pages, these templates won't work. Instead, paste this CSS comment to the top of the page:
/* This template is being discussed in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Help reach a consensus at its entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2026_March_22#Template:template_name.css */
Step 2

List the template

 Edit today's TfD log and paste the following text to the top of the list:
  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name|text=Why you think the template should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name|other template's name|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}

If the template has had previous TfDs, you can add {{Oldtfdlist|previous TfD without square brackets|result of previous TfD}} in the |text= field immediately before your rationale (or alternatively at the very end, after the last }}).

Use an edit summary such as Adding deletion/merger nomination of [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates
If you are nominating multiple templates, paste the following code instead. You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters |). Use the same meaningful title that you chose in Step 1.
  • Multiple templates for deletion: {{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|title=meaningful title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted. ~~~~}}
  • Multiple templates for merging: {{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2 ...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged. ~~~~}}
    • If there is a template you want the other templates to be merged into, you can optionally specify it using |with=.
Related categories
If this template deletion proposal involves a category populated solely by templates, paste this code in the |text= field of the {{Tfd2}} template, before your rationale: {{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
Step 3

Notify users

 Notify the creator of the template, the main contributors, and (if you're proposing a merger) the creator of the other template. (To find them, look in the page history or talk page of the template.) To do this, paste one of the following in their user talk pages:
  • For deletion: {{subst:Tfd notice|template name}} ~~~~
  • For merging: {{subst:Tfm notice|template name|other template's name}} ~~~~
  • Multiple templates: There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination. In these cases, write a personal message.

If you see any WikiProjects banners (they look like this) at the top of the template's talk page, you can let them know about the discussion. Most WikiProjects are subscribed to Article alerts, which means they are automatically notified. If you think they have not been notified, you can paste the same message in the projects' talk pages, or use Deletion sorting lists. Note that Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects.

Close

Consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination notice is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors

While it is sufficient to list a template for discussion at TfD, nominators and others sometimes want to attract more attention from and participation by informed editors. All such efforts must comply with Wikipedia's guideline against biased canvassing.

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviations in the messages you leave about the discussion, link to any relevant policies or guidelines, and link to the TfD discussion page itself. If you are recommending that a template be speedily deleted, please give the criterion that it meets.

  • Notifying related WikiProjects: WikiProjects are groups of editors that are interested in a particular subject or type of editing. If the article is within the scope of one or more WikiProjects, they may welcome a brief, neutral note on their project's talk page(s) about the TfD. You can use {{subst:Tfd notice}} for this. Tagging the nominated template's talk page with a relevant Wikiproject's banner will result in the template being listed in that project's Article Alerts automatically, if they are subscribed to the system. For instance, tagging a template with {{WikiProject Physics}} will list the discussion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.
  • Notifying main contributors: While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the creator and any main contributors of the template and its talk page that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in the page history or talk page.

At this point, no further action is necessary on your part. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone other than you will either close the discussion or, if needed, "relist" it for another seven days of discussion. If the nomination is successful, it will be moved to the Holding Cell until the change is implemented. There is no requirement for nominators to be part of the implementation process, but they are allowed to if they so wish.

Discussion

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand the deletion policy and explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommend subst, subst and delete, or similar. This means they think the template text should be "hard-coded" into the articles that are currently using it. Depending on the content, the template itself may then be deleted; if preserving the edit history for attribution is desirable, it may be history-merged with the target article or moved to mainspace and redirected.

Templates are rarely orphaned—that is, removed from pages that transclude them—before the discussion is closed. A list of open discussions eligible for closure can be found at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussion

Administrators should read the closing instructions before closing a nomination. Note that WP:XFDcloser semi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

March 22

Template:Timeline Women's National Basketball Association

Template was only transcluded to Timeline of the WNBA and thus didn't have much reason to be separate from said article to begin with. Assadzadeh (talk) 17:28, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Aviation Safety Network accident history

This template generates a citation to the Aviation Safety Network wikibase, which as a wiki is not a reliable source. It was previously discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 491#Is ASN (Aviation Safety Network) a reliable source? where it was pretty unanimous that the source isn’t reliable. We shouldn’t have templates generating links to unreliable sources. Danners430 tweaks made 09:50, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

The "Aviation Safety Network accident history" links don't work anymore and do not have replacements, so this template could just be entirely deleted. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 11:55, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Comment: I didn't read from the linked discussion that it said the source isn't reliable. It would seem that the /database/ is one that they themselves are maintaining while /wikibase is the user generated one which shouldn't be cited. Regarding the links not working, User:GreenC, is this fixable? Gonnym (talk) 12:32, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
It is fixable: Example. In this snapshot from 2006, there is no indication it is a wiki and wikibase didn't exist until 2012. From the About Us page it has a section on sources: Most of the information contained in the Aviation Safety Network site is based on information from official sources (authorities, safety boards). Sources used as a basis for the accident database are aircraft production lists, ICAO Aircraft Accident Digests since 1952, and NTSB, TSB etc. For a specific list of publications used, check out the references list. Maybe later editions went UGC? But earlier versions look OK. Just need to use the earlier timestamps on the archives. -- GreenC 17:42, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
GreenC, would this sort of fix require the template to be subst first in order for the bot to read the URL and find a suitable archive? Primefac (talk) 14:07, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
I have a feature called "unwind template" which converts custom templates to plain citations ie. in-effect delete the template. Then it becomes a normal URLREQ or IAbot step to add archives. I can do both at the same edit ie. unwind + add archives. If no archive exists because its past the cut off date then the entire citation should probably be deleted to avoid someone else like IABot unwittingly adding archives to resolve a {{dead link}}. -- GreenC 15:51, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 19:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting mainly to get it off the old logs while I wait for a reply above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 14:03, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:He or she

Propose merging Template:He or she with Template:they.
I think that these templates should be redirected (so that old usages do not break/need replacement). Per WP:EDPRONOUNS basically. The whole point of these templates is to be gender-inclusive but if someone goes by "they" then this template will just call them "he or she". It defeats its own purpose because it does this. This may also be considered WP:INCIVIL as a microaggression. Redirect/merge proposals as follows:

These templates seem pointless. Why not just type out his/her instead of using a template to do that? Traumnovelle (talk) 00:25, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
A deletion of all these templates would be more controversial, so I am only advocating for redirecting right now Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 01:00, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Redirect to four "they" templates. I agree with the list of four mergers in the second section. The nomination is a bit confusing, but I see why the nominations are grouped. The output of "he or she" is incorrect in the modern era for someone whose pronoun is not specified in their preferences; "they" is the appropriate pronoun to use in 2026 for a singular person of unknown gender. The same goes for the other three his/her pronoun templates. This merge should not be technically difficult: we should be able to simply redirect the four sets of "he/she" templates to the four equivalent "they" templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Replying to the "oppose" votes: It is unclear to me whether anything has changed in Wikipedia's software, but the templates that are recommended for merging no longer match the English Wikipedia's default language and are exclusionary with the potential to be hurtful. What I see when I go to Preferences and look at the gender choices is this:

Gender used in messages:

  • Unspecified: Use gender-neutral terms when possible (e.g. "their contributions", "that editor") (default)
  • Use feminine terms when possible (e.g. "her contributions")
  • Use masculine terms when possible (e.g. "his contributions")
If we look at Wikipedia's default output when the GENDER magic word is called, we see {GENDER|Jonesey95} outputting "they" because I have the first choice selected (I have chosen not to specify my gender in my preferences, so "they" is the proper, inclusive way to refer to me). The "he/she" and "he or she" style of templates force the "no gender selected" option to output "he or she" instead of the correct, neutral output "they". Forcing this binary output excludes editors who do not identify as one of the two genders, and goes against MOS:GNL and the very helpful explanation about addressing other editors respectfully at Wikipedia:Editors' pronouns. I'm not interested in righting great wrongs here; it's a matter of making template output match the output of Wikipedia's magic word, our MOS, and basic respect for other editors. If people want to subst all of the he/she template instances to preserve what is written on talk pages before redirecting them for future use, I can see value in that, since preserving editors' original words in discussions is also something we value on Wikipedia. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:43, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
In most cases the output will be exactly identical. In the cases where it will not be, the editor who is being referred to was misgendered. I don't think its a big deal and "preservation" can be ignored Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 22:39, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose per the previous time this was tried - nothing has changed since. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:51, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Just noting (to be administratively pedantic) that something has changed -- Jonesey95 changed their opinion. I'll probably be relisting this on a fresh date but I wanted to note this separately from the relist notice so it didn't get misplaced. Primefac (talk) 12:17, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose per last TfD. Talk pages are records of what was said and shouldn't be tampered with retroactively. Nardog (talk) 03:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    they don't need to be, the template can be replaced with what was said and then deleted. Right now its duplication. If this is kept, then it wshould be marked as archived or the like. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 21:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Not everyone uses the "singular" they. Leave the options open. Masterhatch (talk) 19:32, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
    Singular they is a common pronoun for when the pronouns of someone else is unknown.
    This template also... literally doesn't work like that! The {{they}} template checks a certain user's preferences to see what pronouns/gender they have set in settings. I have "masculine" set in settings, so using the "they" template with my username produces "he".
    The merge just means that the templates would be renamed and the default changed to be inclusive of people who choose to use they. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 00:56, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Note: The merger note is currently rendered by every invoking of these templates, making any text where they are already used essentially unreadable. This should supposedly be reverted immediately. If the templates are finally merged, fine, but completely breaking all their usages in the meanwhile seems unacceptable. Gawaon who goes by ‹The template He or she is being considered for merging.› he (talk) 20:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
    This is how TFD is designed to work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:39, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Gawaon: I think I saw a userscript at one point that hides these messages... Not sure where it is but might be worth looking at Wikipedia:User scripts/List. If not, you could certainly write one fairly easily... As Jonesey95 said, this is how TFD is designed to work. I agree it is at times unsightly, but without it, people like yourself who use this template, may never have been made aware of the fact that it was up for deletion/merger. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 05:44, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
    Hmm, okay. Actually I don't use the template, I came to this discussion because it was mentioned on some talk page I'm watching. Gawaon (talk) 08:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 09:02, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:AcademicSearch

The Microsoft Academic Research site was shut down on December 31, 2021. Any invocation of this template results in a confusing redirect. I think invocations of the template should be globally replaced with {{citation needed}} templates. Back in 2017, the IDs were renumbered and AFAICT nothing was done to address that. Seems like this template is not maintained, and it would be best just to start over. -- mikeblas (talk) 22:49, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete if can't be fixed. Gonnym (talk) 10:27, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
@GreenC: Can your bot do something useful here re trying to rescue dead links? * Pppery * it has begun... 04:28, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 09:02, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Disney resort

No reason for one brand name (Disney) to have their own custom Infobox for their hotels. Just use {{Infobox hotel}} (which is, of course, {{Infobox building}}). Why not one for all Hilton hotels? Or each Marriott hotel? Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:14, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:NBL map

Single-use sports labeled map that has already been replaced by {{OSM Location map}} at National Basketball League (Australia). As such, it is no longer needed. Assadzadeh (talk) 05:30, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:NBL labeled map

Single-use sports labeled map that has already been replaced by {{OSM Location map}} at National Basketball League (Australia). As such, it is no longer needed. Assadzadeh (talk) 05:26, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Momentum Broadcasting

No navigational purpose. All four stations, in the same area, are linked by {{Visalia-Tulare Radio}}. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:43, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Jamuna Group Media

No navigational purpose. The company owns too few media outlets to justify a template. The broader company owns too few standalone notable assets (only one non-media asset has an article). Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Ha-meem Group Media

No navigational purpose. The company owns too few media outlets to justify a template. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:39, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:TVVision

Links not enough articles to serve a navigational purpose. The two articles it does link have questionable notability. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:38, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Smile FM stations

No navigational purpose. Only three stations on this network have their own articles: WLGH, WSLI (AM), and WSMZ (AM) (the latter two being newer and not in this navbox). Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:32, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Sunbeam Television

This company has only ever owned three TV stations. These three. There are not enough articles to sustain a navbox. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:28, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:El Dorado Broadcasters

El Dorado's exit from the Yuma, Arizona, market renders this template redundant to {{Victor Valley Radio}}. Of the three Yuma stations, two have been sold, and the third is currently off the air (source). Five entries would be fine if in different markets, but the other five entries are all in the Victor Valley of California. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:27, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Simmons Media Group

The article on this radio station group was deleted in 2025, after apparently some kind of hijacking of the article to reflect one of its successors. Simmons once had enough stations to merit a navbox. Some of them still transclude this page even though they are not linked from here, nor has Simmons owned them in 15 or more years. Currently, Redrock owns five stations, of which four have articles., and all of them are in the same geographic area and transclude {{St. George Radio}}. No article that transcludes this navbox should be doing so, either. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:24, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Rockfleet Broadcasting

Rockfleet only owns three TV stations, too few to sustain a navbox. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:11, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Csworldwide1 (talk) 04:23, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Heartland Media

The company owns two television stations, for which there are not enough links to sustain a navbox. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:09, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Csworldwide1 (talk) 04:24, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

March 21

Template:Infobox Italian comune 2

Recently created template that duplicates Template:Infobox Italian comune. No reason to have a 2 version. This is what the sandbox of a template is for. Note that the creator of this Infobox has a failed edit request to implement this broken code. This is not the way to go about this. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:34, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep: V1 use a manual data or wikidata. V2 adding automatic "actual" statistic (area size, populatiom) from dataset. V2 as a path into V1 is not enabled for testing require, but the template require a real Italian comune pages. Actual way is user-like as into infobox give low template call (Ex. Special:Diff/1344337190). Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 07:22, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:ClockBlock/doc

Humor pages should not interfere with the rest of the wiki procedures, yet User:Hex is intentionally doing so. They've reverted adding the /doc page here causing the /doc page to be unused and orphaned, and reverted deleting the /doc page here which what happens per T5. Either the /doc page is needed and should be restored, or it is not needed. Gonnym (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Keep and include in {{ClockBlock}}, per Wikipedia:Template namespace#Guidelines: "Templates should be clearly documented as to their usage and scope." – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    I'm fine with that also. Gonnym (talk) 13:51, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete and trout both the person who thought it was a good use of anyone's time, let alone their own, to add a totally unnecessary and pointless documentation template to a humorous template in the first place and the nominator for their hyperbolic claim of "interfering with wiki procedures". Both of you need to go outside once in a while.  — Hex • talk 08:24, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    Feel free to cite a guideline or policy. And I went outside three days ago! That should be enough. I can see outside through the bars on my cell window. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:40, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
    I draw your attention to the top of WP:TMP, where like on every guideline it says

    This page documents an English Wikipedia project content guideline. Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply.

    The determination of when exceptions are applicable is based upon an understanding of the common English words guideline and should, accompanied by common sense. For guidance on the latter topic please consult WP:UCS.  — Hex • talk 13:24, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 12:43, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Image generation banners

Propose merging Template:W3C Errors with Template:Image Generation.
This seems to have started with {{Inkscape}} which was then expanded by the creator of the other templates into the meta-template {{Image Generation}}. If we are going to go the route of having image generation tags for multiple possible creation programs, it makes more sense to have a single template rather than create new templates for every possible program (especially since a bunch were recently deleted). Primefac (talk) 12:36, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Abraham

Another linkspam sidebar... Per WP:SIDEBAR, this is far from a group of articles with a single, coherent subject. It will never be fully transcluded and is useless for navigation, serving instead as decoration. Let's not take away so much space from images and real educational content. MediaKyle (talk) 11:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete Weak delete per nom. (If anyone thinks the content should be kept, then they can convert it into a footer template.) Feline Hymnic (talk) 12:24, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Downgrading my previous "delete". That had been based on the excessive amount of screen real-estate it had been swallowing and its consequent over-dominance of the main subject matter. Since then, the change by Wikieditor662 (to whom thanks!) has largely addressed that aspect. Feline Hymnic (talk) 22:15, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep this is far from a group of articles with a single, coherent subject. this is simply incorrect. Abraham is the main subject, and every other article on there is related to him. These are a group of articles that all center around the main page and help guide readers towards other similar and related pages and understand the topic better. There's no reason for this to be deleted.
Also, sidebars just like this are used in multiple WP:FA articles, such as Jesus and Genghis Khan. Wikieditor662 (talk) 16:56, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
PS I just collapsed the list, so it should be much shorter now. Wikieditor662 (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Being vaguely related is not enough for inclusion in a sidebar... The Genghis Khan sidebar is actually not too bad, as it's constrained to articles such as Wives of Genghis Khan and Burial place of Genghis Khan... Such articles don't exist for Abraham. Instead, this sidebar includes everything under the sun, like Ancient Egypt. This is not useful for navigation and takes away space from educational materials. See also WP:BIDIRECTIONAL -- this sidebar doesn't belong on most of these articles, so most of these articles shouldn't be on the sidebar. We really just don't need any more of these. MediaKyle (talk) 17:19, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
But WP:ATD says If editing can address all relevant reasons for deletion, this should be done rather than deleting the page. So if removing certain articles you don't think fit could be an alternative, shouldn't that be done instead? Wikieditor662 (talk) 23:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
I don't think that is an alternative. If you removed all of the articles that don't belong, you'd have nothing left. This is not useful to our readers and should be deleted. MediaKyle (talk) 23:33, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Second update: I've removed some lesser significant/relevant articles. Let me know if you want me to remove even more, I can do that.
But there are definitely articles that are very much related to Abraham and are about him. In fact, I'd say he has just as many (if not more!) relevant articles to him than Genghis Khan. For example Abraham's family tree, Abraham and Lot's conflict, Abraham and the Idol Shop, and many others. Wikieditor662 (talk) 23:47, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 12:10, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

U2 album navboxes

Nothing here other than track listings, not really an appropriate use of a navbox, better left for normal navigation through articles, etc. There's also {{U2 songs}} with all the songs in chronological order. --woodensuperman 16:33, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep. Seems fine to me; these list the songs on the album for navigation, while {{U2 songs}} lists all songs in chronological order ... which isn't so convenient sometimes. -- mikeblas (talk) 22:58, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete. As long as Template:U2 songs exists, these are completely redundant. Either we have one navigation template for all songs, or separate ones for albums. We don't need both. The full list one can be reformatted to be split by albums and not years. Gonnym (talk) 10:30, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 12:09, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Merge – While a single {{U2 songs}} navbox is clearly more ideal, its current format of sorting by decade produces cumbersomely large groups of links, and makes it harder to navigate. Sorting the songs by album, in a similar manner to this group of templates, would make it much much easier to navigate. — AFC Vixen 🦊 19:15, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Merge or delete per Gonnym and AFC Vixen. One template sorted by album is the ideal solution. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:56, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Cr-IPL/home

Unnecessary template; could be replaced with plain wikitext. Vestrian24Bio 13:24, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment: I'm looking at the usage as 2007–08 Sheffield Shield season and I don't see any space issues where "Home team" can't be written fully. Why do we need an ambiguous abbreviation here? Unless there is an actual valid usage here, I'm leaning replace with full text and delelte. Gonnym (talk) 18:15, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 12:00, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Authoritarian drift during the second Trump administration sidebar

The template has been created owing to the current political situation in the United States, but this creates WP:RECENCY bias, and notably the head article that the template links to is not just about the last 15 months of politics, but is about the long history of Democratic backsliding in the United States (and scholars note that Trump is merely reaping the returns of a long history of democratic backsliding. See, e.g., ). Thus there is no head article for this template subject, and the wider WP:SIDEBAR for democratic backsliding in the US would not look like this. The template as it stands contains POV in the curation (not so much in recognising the backsliding, which is well attested, but in positioning it as a recent phenomenon). A WP:SIDEBAR must be a small and closely related collation of articles, but if collation is carried out by template editors, there is also a curious synthesis here. We are defining a subject that is not so narrowly and specifically defined, and is not so partisan. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:38, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete Might very well be possible to create a sidebar on this topic eventually but we need to make the article first for it to be appropriate. Trialpears (talk) 11:15, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete Concurring with the Tfd request and first opinion. One or more theses already published outside Wikipedia forming the basis of an accepted Wikipedia article with the title Authoritarian drift during the second Trump administration should be the starting point. Group29 (talk) 12:00, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete There is no other template called "authoritarian drift/democratic backsliding of *one administration/country*" or similar. Could be maybe "Democratic backsliding by country". HudecEmil (talk) 13:41, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete Infoboxes and nav templates like this should be kept to objective aspects, there is just too much subjective nature for this to be neutral. The type of information covered need article-body context space to be included, which is available elsewhere, just not in a navigation template. Masem (t) 15:32, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Strong keep, namely per WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM and WP:BEFORE which advocate fixing problems rather than deleting articles/templates in their entirety when the articles/templates in question can be salvaged. This template may be flawed, but that is not a reason to delete the template in its entirety. I am very open to radically restructuring the template which clearly corresponds to some sort of pattern in the Trump administration identified by WP:RS (whether democratic backsliding, authoritarian drift, or otherwise) and therefore should exist in some capacity.
  • The template has been created owing to the current political situation in the United States, but this creates WP:RECENCY bias How? Creating a template about recent events is not inherently violating of WP:RECENCY so you need to explain why it allegedly does so rather than just saying it does with no evidence to back it up.
  • there is no head article for this template subject If there are problems with it being called "authoritarian drift" rather than "democratic backsliding", that's a reason to rename the template back to "democratic backsliding", not to delete the template entirely.
  • If there are problems with restricting the article's scope to Trump 2 because the democratic backsliding article details the entire history of democratic backsliding in the United States (rather than only Trump 2), that's a reason to A) expand the template's scope to be inclusive of the most notable democratic backsliding instances in U.S. history or B) create a Trump 2 democratic backsliding/authoritarian drift article that will correspond to this sidebar, not to delete the sidebar entirely.
  • The template as it stands contains POV in the curation (not so much in recognising the backsliding, which is well attested, but in positioning it as a recent phenomenon) No it does not. Saying there is authoritarian drift/democratic backsliding during Trump 2 in no way implies there was no authoritarian drift/democratic backsliding before Trump 2.
  • Another user saying there is just too much subjective nature for this to be neutral This is about articles related to Trump 2. An article being on the sidebar does not imply it is a clear-cut instance of democratic backsliding. All sidebars have a subjective element so this is not a criticism of this sidebar in particular as much as it is a criticism of all sidebars in general.
  • Sirfurboy says this template engages in synthesis but does not explain how or why. It is implied this is because articles are not closely related enough to the topic, but that's again a reason to remove unrelated articles from the sidebar rather than delete it in its entirety. How unrelated must an article be for it not to be included? That's something we should discuss on the article talk page.
  • Speaking more directly on the WP:SYNTH allegation: if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, but looking like a duck alone or walking like a duck alone are not sufficient to establish that it's a duck, but WP:RS say that it is in fact a duck, then using WP:COMMONSENSE to put the looking and walking like a duck under the umbrella of being related to the allegation of being a duck (as reported by WP:RS) is not WP:SYNTH because common sense is not synthesis. Also, synthesis does not apply to talk pages meaning, in the context of meta decisions like which articles we can include on sidebars, we can use some amount of SYNTH to determine what belongs where on the sidebar. This is what we did in Template:Gaza genocide sidebar by synthesizing information to include things that are not directly related like List of companies involved in the Gaza war, and WP:EDITCON on the Gaza genocide sidebar has determined that doing so is fully appropriate even though the article makes no explicit mention of the Gaza genocide.
Look... when I created this template, I knew there would be challenges and issues. I expected these issues and notified several talk pages as I was creating it to receive feedback. But rather than simply deleting it in its entirety, let's figure something out because clearly it has the potential to be beneficial to Wikipedia even if you don't believe it's perfect in its current form. I'm open to doing the bulk of the extra work radically restructuring it, e.g., to expand scope if that's what it will take to preserve the template. It just doesn't make sense to completely remove this template simply because a corollary article for Trump 2 demo backsliding/auth drift doesn't exist yet. We can rename or trim this sidebar in the meantime but deleting it feels extreme, especially when the demo backsliding article it links to is so closely related with the only difference being the time period examined. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 18:52, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. I recognize that this is a difficult issue, and that we are early in the progression from recentism to established consensus in the source material, so I do not discount the arguments for deletion. But I see this as something that is sufficiently well backed up by secondary sourcing that we should not shrink from including it on the basis of it being contentious. The template subject is recognized by no less than a NATO-associated organization: , scholarly journals: and , and law professors: . Are we lacking a Wikipedia article on the subject, that we ought to have first, before having a template? No, we have Democratic backsliding in the United States, which specifically covers what has occurred in Trump's second term, so that argument is not based on facts. (You can blame me for having changed the template name and header from "Democratic backsliding", per these two talk discussions: 1 , 2, but please don't be confused by the terminology.) Is it important to also recognize the history of drift pre-Trump? Yes, of course, but the solution is to have another such template, covering earlier times, and use each template appropriately on pages where it applies. Is there a valid issue, that this template might need to have some insufficiently-sourced entries deleted, and might need to be removed from some pages where it was applied, in order to avoid original research? Yes, but that should be done through normal editing, rather than through deletion. So is there an unemotional and policy-based case to be made for deletion? Well, I accept that good-faith editors can disagree about that, but I think not. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:39, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nom, inclusion of a lot of these entries is POV, and as a topic this doesn't meet point 1 at WP:SIDEBAR (All articles within a template relate to a single, coherent subject.), nor point 2 (The subject of the template should be mentioned in every article.), nor point 3 (The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent.) Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 21:55, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
WP:SIDEBAR is a guideline, and Guidelines are sets of best practices that are supported by consensus and should generally be followed, though with occasional exceptions. I think this makes sense as an exception because so many multifaceted and often interchangeable terms are used in the sidebar and important context would be lost via a stricter interpretation that's beneficial to the reader. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 07:07, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete, a concoction of OR and POV that, as explained above, does not fulfill the purpose of a sidebar. Optionally, we can delete all other sidebars along with this one. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:54, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep per Tryptofish. And I agree with Alexandraaaacs1989 that any insufficiencies can be fixed or repaired, rather than resorting to an outright deletion of an otherwise very useful and helpful template. Support renaming the template to something more suitable, if that is what consensus decides here. ~2026-16297-11 (talk) 05:24, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep per Alexandraaaacs. Unlike the recency questions around the Democratic Backsliding article, this sidebar has a very specific remit, relating to a well-defined period and range of activities. It's plainly notable - it's been extensively discussed in news media, specialist literature, and general current affairs books. To respond specifically to Thebiguglyalien's !vote: (1) Simply saying 'POV' when the item in question is about a contentious political topic cuts no ice with me. Editors must learn to distinguish between well-founded, reasonably balanced coverage of a topic which is itself the subject of intense politics, and coverage which actively pushes a specific political perspective. If we can write NPOV articles and supporting materials about the Paris Commune or Stalin's purges, we can do it here too. (2) No, we should not 'delete all other sidebars along with this one'. Firstly, because that's well beyond the scope of this discussion. Secondly, because such a proposal smacks of WP:NOSE. Let's try and do some good with the situation that is actually before us. GenevieveDEon (talk) 10:31, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep if template's name changed back to "democratic backsliding" because of extensive media coverage about it and almost every expert has been openly decrying Trump's actions as authoritarian; I don't think we're necessarily ready to call it an "authoritarian drift" because it's not ready yet and the language can be overtly negative. There are several reasons for this:
    • The recently released data in V-Dem's Democracy Report 2026 shows that the United States has lost its longstanding liberal democracy status, but it hasn't lost its overall democracy status just yet. Nevertheless, the report shows that the US is experiencing one of the fastest episodes of autocratization since Nazi Germany in 1933, and certainly the fastest in the country's history.
    • Freedom House only declined the US by 3 points instead of 30 (out of 100) in which they're supposed to because it has gotten so bad.
    • Lastly, we have yet to see The Economist's Democracy Index for 2025, but I'm certain it's going to be very ugly for the US.

Also, there's a lot to go in the Trump presidency, only 14 months out of 48, and it's only going to get A LOT WORSE. Either way, the four years of chaos will put a permanent scar in American history. harukaamaranth 13:09, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

The template was named "Democratic backsliding during the second Trump administration". Do you mean it should be changed to "Democratic backsliding" (a global reach), or perhaps "Democratic backsliding in the United States" (matching the head article) or that it should be kept as a narrow focus on the events of the last 14 months only? (For which we have no head article). Shouldn't the head article precede the editor collation of "tightly related" articles? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 13:30, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:WNBA labeled map

Single-use sports labeled map that has already been replaced by {{OSM Location map}} at Women's National Basketball Association. As such, it is no longer needed. Assadzadeh (talk) 05:00, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:READS market areas

WP:TOOBIG; links from an article (RabbitEars) which may or may not be notable. No links from other articles (or even other templates). Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:16, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete Useless for navigation because of its size. The templates it links to are in a category tree. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 05:18, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:ABC Owned Television Stations

Redundant to Template:Disney–ABC stations. Delete or merge. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 04:07, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Merge by deleting and then moving {{Disney–ABC stations}} to this title and giving it the heading as seen here. The Disney–ABC template is transcluded by some pages that should not have it: Radio Disney, WMVP, WFRO (AM), Radio Disney Group. The template at the OTV title shouldn't have former stations in it and is transcluded less. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 05:16, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Shop Direct Group

Navbox with link to one article Update6 (talk) 02:14, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete No navigational purpose, and indeed the name of the company is out of date on the template. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 05:18, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Major U.S. TV O-O Stations

Wouldn't make sense given the sheer number of CW O&Os on subchannels, and especially after what User:Sammi Brie said here. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:30, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete For context, let me explain an event that happened over the last five years. The major US networks own some portion of their stations, traditionally in major markets. These are called owned-and-operated stations or O&Os But in 2022, The CW was sold to Nexstar Media Group, which is a very large owner of TV stations and just got even larger. The result is that stations that are "CW O&Os" are barely meeting the definition, including in some quite tiny markets.
    There is a separate case to cut this template and reduce navbox bloat. It is redundant to one of {{Disney–ABC stations}}, {{CBS News and Stations}}, {{Fox Corporation}}, {{NBCUniversal}}, {{Nexstar Media Group}}, or {{TelevisaUnivision}}. And each of the articles linked through this template will transclude one of the above five navboxes. We can reduce unnecessary navboxes on every linked page, in 221 pages, by getting rid of this one. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 02:54, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete - concur with previous opinion. Group29 (talk) 12:04, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
  • 'Delete Per Sammi, as ownership information about each network's owned stations are already in their templates (and individual articles and lists); there's also silent blending in of MyNetworkTV stations, a service which has now blurred to a mere ten hour block of reruns which can air at 7am or 1am, with Fox treating those 'owned' stations more as extended annexes of their Fox stations rather than having their own personalities, so this will also address that long-lingering issue (which has also saw its own deletion discussions for associated articles, templates and categories over the last year). At this point, the CW is becoming more of an Ion/Scripps situation where master schedules are becoming more common with these stations and those part of The CW Plus are being blended into one entity which is much more nationalized than a traditional NBC or Fox-style network. Nathannah • 📮 02:11, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete listing them are no longer viable especially since Nexstar-Tegna merger and MyNetworkTV becoming syndicated service. Perhaps also related to WP:NENAN--John123521t c 05:15, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
    Alright I found out MyNetworkTV is not on list. But anyway. John123521t c 07:44, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

March 20

Template:EPPCO

Once the company sold off its TV stations, not enough newspapers had articles to justify a corporate navbox. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 23:19, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

    • Delete per nom. Csworldwide1 (talk) 03:09, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Quincy Media

Quincy Media sold its television stations to other companies, so the station articles now transclude their new owners' navboxes. The newspapers were also sold, but it seems the navbox was never removed from The Hannibal Courier-Post. Despite the dozens of links, the navigational purpose was lost because it is common practice in WP:TVS that the navbox shall only be transcluded for the current owner. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 23:13, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Csworldwide1 (talk) 03:10, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Titan Broadcast Management

Titan once owned TV stations, but as they were sold to other companies, they were all changed to transclude their navboxes. The last linked article was just sold for spectrum. No current navigational purpose. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 23:11, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Csworldwide1 (talk) 03:11, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:UCCorp

This company was purchased by Gray Television (now Gray Media) in 2019 and the articles linked, except for the parent, now transclude its navbox instead. Even if this were not the case, it would have only had three pages to link to properly (KEYC-TV, WWNY-TV, WNYF-CD). Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 23:10, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Csworldwide1 (talk) 03:10, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:POTD/2035-02-03

It makes no sense to reserve a spot for POTD 10 years in advance. Pichpich (talk) 16:27, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep: it is meant to coincide with the 100th anniversary of his birth.
Also why did you nominate this template specifically? {{POTD/2036-05-15}} and {{POTD/2038-07-29}} were created before this one. ―Howard • 🌽33 16:31, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Ukrainian State Prizes

One link. Useless for navigation. --woodensuperman 16:18, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Mojtaba Khamenei series

WP:TOOSOON. The sidebar lists eight articles, none of which are specifically about Mojtaba, and all of which are already well-linked on his own page. The only link that is specially about him, "Death to Mojtaba", is a redirect. Johnson524 13:57, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Person of the year by Gazeta Wyborcza

Unsourced, no article on the subject. --woodensuperman 12:47, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Ursula K. Le Guin Prize

Only links two articles. WP:NENAN. --woodensuperman 10:46, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Since it’s a relatively new prize, there are only four winners, two of the links are red. Yamato2 (talk) 17:45, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Broaden

Propose merging Template:Broaden with Template:Generalize.
Seem too similar to me. Template:Coverage is also somewhere between this and the Template:Undue weight... 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:32, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Shevchenko National Prize templates

Only one or two links with articles. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 08:59, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Hey, yes, there aren’t many links yet, but it's one of the main and an oldest Ukrainian prize. It definitely deserves separate templates and I think the articles should be translated rather than removing the templates. Yamato2 (talk) 17:48, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Keane songs

Redundant to Template:Keane, which it was split off from without explanation back in 2012. I've re-added the articles from this template to Template:Keane, and as you can see, the navbox's size is nowhere near large enough that a split would be called for. All that having two navboxes for this topic seems to accomplish is to make navigation for the topic more confusing and increase the work required to maintain and place the navboxes. Martin IIIa (talk) 03:01, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Personally, I'd have just redirected it. --woodensuperman 09:10, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
I didn't know that one could redirect templates. Is there a guideline page specific to this that I can educate myself with? Martin IIIa (talk) 16:21, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Sportspeople at the Parapan American Games by year

Template was only being used (and only links to) Category space of wikipedia, been replaced in usage by Template:Category series navigation Epluribusunumyall (talk) 02:31, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Delete per nom. --woodensuperman 12:59, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Godzilla video games

I feel that this template should be merged with this Godzilla template.

-TalkTuahLunchly

March 19

Template:Books of Nevi'im

Same as the Ketuvim template, I see no particular reason for this sidebars existence, as it recapitulates the information in the more comprehensive Tanakh OT template, and that's presumably why the only Book of the Nevi'im it is used on at time of writing is Book of Jonah, which shows the same information in two templates side-by-side WikiMacaroonsCinnamon? 19:20, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Books of Ketuvim

I see no particular reason for this sidebars existence, as it recapitulates the information in the more comprehensive Tanakh OT template. You can see the same information about a given book's position in the Ketuvim on pages like Book of Job as it stands at time of writing. WikiMacaroonsCinnamon? 19:18, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Texas Courts of Appeals

No transclusions. All linked articles have been redirected to the main article. Not usable for navigation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:08, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

March 18

Template:Qpids

Celebrities on a TV series fail WP:PERFNAV. --woodensuperman 14:22, 18 March 2026 (UTC)


Single-use sports labeled maps (18 March 2026)

All four of these {{Image label}}- and {{Location map}}-based templates were transcluded on a single article each, and I've replaced them all with {{OSM Location map}}s on the articles themselves.[1][2][3][4] They needn't be separate templates, especially in these fairly simple use cases. See also the TfD discussions on {{WPBL labeled map}}, {{CFL labelled map}}, {{NLL arenas map}}, {{PWHL labeled map}}, and {{NWSL labeled map}}. Pinging Assadzadeh, Gonnym, Frietjes, Jonesey95, MikeVitale, Pppery, Servite et contribuere, Spesh531, and The Sands of Time 0 as participants in these previous discussions. — AFC Vixen 🦊 07:28, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

I would suggest adding Template:WNBA labeled map to the list as well, since Women's National Basketball Association already includes an {{OSM Location map}}. Assadzadeh (talk) 07:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
I've been criticised in the past for nominating too many things for deletion at once, so I'm just going about it a few at a time, to avoid a potential procedural close. — AFC Vixen 🦊 08:13, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
I have nominated Template:WNBA labeled map for deletion here. Assadzadeh (talk) 12:20, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:55, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 18:56, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Subst and delete per nom. --MikeVitale 22:59, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Assadzadeh (talk) 04:49, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

March 17

UCI Women's team navigational boxes

These templates seem to be poorly maintained. Whenever a rider changes teams, this template would need to be replaced on their page. Whenever a team's riders changes, the template itself would need to be changed. The conventional practice now appears to be to use the proyears and proteam parameters in the {{Infobox cyclist}} template. Kiwipete (talk) 21:31, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Yellowbirds

Two notable albums. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 09:09, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Forgive Durden

Two notable albums. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 08:59, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Flickerstick

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G7 by Explicit (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 16:14, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Two notable albums. WP:NENAN --woodensuperman 08:56, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Tubelnk

Simple link template, only used at London Overground. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:36, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

March 16

Template:LPL

Propose merging Template:LPL with Template:FMXL.
Regardless of the fact that these two templates have non-obvious naming strategies, the only difference between these two templates is that LPL appends an "-LP" to the parameter provided in the URL. With only 115 transclusions it's probably easy enough to just change the existing template calls and add that LP tag to the template parameter instead of having the template do it. Primefac (talk) 16:11, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Merge per nominator FCCdata's site search (where this goes) is spelling-specific, and if there are multiple stations with the same calls it does direct to a disambiguation page showing each callset, so the -LP designator is unnecessary. Nathannah • 📮 02:33, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
Merge with the appropriate change in parameter for former uses of LPL. I'd also like to suggest the template name Template:FCCdata for the template to make its function clearer and more generalizable per WP:TPN. I am assuming that the name came from the "-FX" fake call sign RadioLocator, the former data source, used for translators (the station class is FX in FCC records, as "translator" often is abbreviated to "xltr"). Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 04:51, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Both Good Mythical Morning and Looking for Ms. Locklear redirect to Rhett & Link's article, meaning this only connects three articles and fails WP:NENAN. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 13:17, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:JRE Line Symbol and similar

These Japan-rail-line-symbol-related templates become inappropriate because Module:Adjacent stations/JR East, etc. provide icons. Thus, they should be replaced by {{ric}}. See also: 1 and 2. Sinsyuan✍️TW→GA 13:00, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

I am not opposed to deleting these individual templates and merging them into {{ric}}. おーい魚 (talk) 14:11, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
delete after replacing with {{ric}}. Frietjes (talk) 14:50, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
All of the above exist in {{ric}}, so yeah I don't see the need to keep them. Delete. MacDoesWiki/Predinova (he/him, talk) 21:58, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete - Support the deletion of these seperate templates now they have been obselete really with {{ric}}. Liandrei (talk) 18:25, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Referendum results

Propose merging Template:Referendum results with Template:Referendum.
These two templates appear to perform the same function (display a referendum result table) and share most of their parameters, with the main differences being that {{Referendum results}} displays as a two-part table and has more customized options, while {{Referendum}} has more options regarding passing conditions. Should they be harmonized into a single template with access to all of their parameters, and a display choice between a single table and a two-part table? Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:18, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

  • I would suggest just deleting {{Referendum}} and having a bot replace all the uses of it with {{Referendum results}}, which is a wrapper for {{Election results}} that autocalculates percentages etc and helps avoid / spot transcription errors. I'm not sure the description of the latter being a 'two-part table' and the other not is fully accurate – they just have a different way of dividing the table between the main votes for/against and the valid/invalid/registered figures. Perhaps this was more obvious before the colouring was removed from the latter. Cheers, Number 57 20:02, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:ABC Radio and Regional Content

I think this is a redundant navbox - all its content has been moved into Template:ABC Local Radio. Marcostev8 (talk) 02:05, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete – I think the ABC navboxes in general could do with a couple of mergers and splits, but for the timebeing, this particular one needn't exist when {{ABC Local Radio}} covers navigation on this topic far better. — AFC Vixen 🦊 05:34, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

March 15

Module:SongContestData

Userify this module since all of the templates that used it were moved to the creator's userspace at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2026_February_22#SongContest_templates. Gonnym (talk) 17:49, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:42, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • move to the module sandbox space. Frietjes (talk) 14:51, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Silver W Award Nomination

No transclusions or incoming links from discussions. Created in 2024. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:18, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep as creator, meant for WP:W Awards as a nomination process. No transclusions or incoming links because no one has been nominated for it yet. I am not as active onwiki as I want to be because of life and work but I do let others take control of that project where they see fit. Thanks, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 02:51, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete. This process never started and as the creator above noted they are not really active, no one else will use it. Gonnym (talk) 08:45, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:40, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
delete, since it is unlikely that it will be used. Frietjes (talk) 14:53, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Chunom and Template:Chuhan

Template:Chunom and Template:Chuhan are redundant to Template:Viet.

See:
{{Chunom|越南}} → ‹The template Chunom is being considered for deletion.›  chữ Nôm: 越南
{{Chuhan|越南}} → ‹The template Chuhan is being considered for deletion.›  chữ Hán: 越南
{{Viet|越南|context=nom}} → chữ Nôm: 越南
{{Viet|越南|context=han}} → chữ Hán: 越南


Template:Viet can also show literal translations and the Vietnamese alphabet, which Template:Chunom and Template:Chuhan.

{{Viet|越南|lit=Viet South}} → Vietnamese: 越南; lit. 'Viet South'
{{Viet|越南|cqn=Việt Nam}} → Vietnamese: 越南; chữ Quốc ngữ: Việt Nam
S Y T · 三葉草 22:29, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment: ideally all 3 should not exist and {{Langx}} should be able to support this. Gonnym (talk) 08:42, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:40, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
Oppose. There is something really wrong with Template:Viet. As seen in the last two examples, it basically presents the obsolete Chinese-style character spellings in a way that suggests that they are the normal/proper/standard/default Vietnamese forms, as it labels them simply 'Vietnamese' and places them first, and it gives the actually official alphabetic forms as an afterthought with the qualification 'chữ Quốc ngữ'. This looks like an attempt to covertly re-litigate a spelling reform that took place more than a century ago. Wikipedia is not the place to do this (not that it's a good idea in the first place)--Anonymous44 (talk) 04:45, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
@Anonymous44: As the creator of the template Viet, I'd like to make my reasoning more clear because it is not an attempt to promote the usage of chữ Nôm or chữ Hán over the Vietnamese alphabet. I created this because I think there is no need to have separate templates for chữ Nôm or chữ Hán. The intention is to create a single template that can display Vietnamese in chữ Nôm, chữ Hán, the Vietnamese alphabet, and literal translations with the option to display no links and no labels. If you look at Template talk:Viet, you'd see that I'd prefer the Vietnamese alphabet to be first, however this is the first template I've built and do not know how to do that. I'd hope to gain support for the idea of a single template to display Vietnamese in different scripts and improve Template:Viet, rather than having to maintain two separate templates for chữ Nôm and chữ Hán. In theory, the template should always use the 'context' parameter and never display "Vietnamese" rather than "chữ Nôm" and "chữ Hán". I'd also like to make it clear that this is not an attempt to bludgeon the process, but I just want to make my intentions clear and refute the idea that this is an attempt to re-litigate a spelling reform and promote a largely obsolete script. S Y T · 三葉草 21:22, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
OK, I'm taking note of your intentions, but the fact is that right now, Template:Viet objectively does what it does and we do have to take its current effect into account when we take a stance on this proposal.--Anonymous44 (talk) 23:05, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Comment: And then there is Template:Vi-nom. Yeah, they should all be unified, but I don't see why there is a need to create a completely new Template:Viet, especially since the OP don't seem to be familiar with the technical aspects. I'd like to ping an expert, @Mxn, could you please assist us? Thank you. --Greenknight dv (talk) 23:55, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Barbados medical cases chart

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more templates or modules. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review).

The result of the discussion was Delete for multiple reasons:

AnomieBOT⚡ 15:14, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

All are used on one article. All templates except for medical cases chart are a graph but are no longer displayed making it useless and no longer necessary. The vast majority of covid data templates like these have been deleted. Six years later there is no longer a need for these and Wikipedia is not a machine to crunch numbers for information like this. Other sites are still keeping track of such data and is not the purpose of Wikipedia. All should be deleted. --~2026-14463-52 (talk) 15:25, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 18:37, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Barbados new cases chart, Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Barbados new deaths chart, Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Barbados daily active chart, and Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Barbados deaths by age and gender chart as they use the disabled Graph extension. No comment on Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Barbados medical cases chart. Gonnym (talk) 10:21, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template or module's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Old discussions

Completed discussions

A list of completed discussions that still require action taken on the template(s) — for example, a merge between two infoboxes — can be found at the "Holding Cell".

For an index of all old and archived discussions, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Archives.

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI