Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"WP:TFD" redirects here. For the page used for TimedText or talk page deletion discussions, seeWikipedia:Miscellany for deletion.
This page is about discussion of templates. For a list of templates used for discussion, seeWikipedia:List of discussion templates.
Find this page confusing?Just use this link to ask for help on your talk page;a volunteer will visit you there shortly!
XFD backlog
V Nov Dec Jan Feb Total
CfD 0 0 1 34 35
TfD 0 0 0 11 11
MfD 0 0 0 5 5
FfD 0 0 0 4 4
RfD 0 0 3 83 86
AfD 0 0 0 1 1
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion

On this page, the deletion or merging oftemplatesandmodules,except as notedbelow,is discussed.

How to use this page

[edit]

Whatnotto propose for discussion here

[edit]
Shortcut

The majority of deletion and merger proposals concerning pages in thetemplate namespaceandmodule namespaceshould be listed on this page. However, there are a few exceptions:

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

Reasons to delete a template

[edit]
Shortcut
  1. The template violates some part of thetemplate 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 bytemplate substitution(the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks),and has no likelihood ofbeingused.
  4. The template violates a policy such asNeutral point of vieworCivilityand 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 Templatesmay be able to help.

Templates for which none of these apply may be deleted byconsensushere. 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

[edit]
Shortcuts

To list a template for deletion or merging, adhere to the following three-step process.UtilizingTwinkleis strongly recommended as it automates and simplifies these steps. To use Twinkle, click TWin the toolbar (top right of the page), then select XFD. Donotinclude the "Template:" prefix in any of the steps, unless specifically instructed otherwise.

Step Instructions
I: Tag the template. Add one of the following codes to the top of the template page:

Note:

  • If it is an inline template, do not add a newline between the TfD notice and the code of the template.
  • If the template to be nominated for deletion isprotected,make a request for the TfD tag to be added, by posting on the template's talk page and using the{{editprotected}}template to catch the attention ofadministratorsortemplate editors.
  • For templates designed to besubstituted,add<noinclude>...</noinclude>around the TfD notice to prevent it from being substituted alongside the template.
  • Do not mark the edit as minor.
  • Use an edit summary like
    Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]]
    or
    Nominated for merging; see [[Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Template:name of template]].
  • Before saving your edit, preview your edit to ensure the Tfd message is displayed properly.

Multiple templates:If you are nominating multiple related 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, replacingdiscussion titlewith the title you chose (but still not changing thePAGENAMEcode).

Related categories:If including template-populated tracking categories in the TfD nomination, add{{Catfd|template name}}to the top of any categories that would be deleted as a result of the TfD, this time replacingtemplate namewith the name of the template being nominated. (If you instead chose a meaningful title for a multiple nomination, use{{Catfd|header=title of nomination}}instead.)

TemplateStyles pages:The above templates will not work onTemplateStylespages. Instead, add a 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/2025_February_27#Template:template_name.css */
II: List the template at TfD. Edit today's TfD logand paste the following textto 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 brackets|result of previous TfD}}directly after the|text=before the why (or alternatively, after the}}of theTfd2/Catfd2).

Use an edit summary such as
Adding [[Template:template name]].

Multiple templates:If this is a deletion proposal involving multiple templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfd2|template name 1|template name 2...|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be deleted.~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters|). Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

If this is a merger proposal involving more than two templates, use the following:

{{subst:Tfm2|template name 1|template name 2...|with=main template (optional)|title=meaningful discussion title|text=Why you think the templates should be merged.~~~~}}

You can add up to 50 template names (separated by vertical bar characters|), plus one more in|with=.|with=does not need to be used, but should be the template that you want the other templates to be merged into. Make sure to include the same meaningful discussion title that you chose before in Step 1.

Related categories:If this is a deletion proposal involving a template and a category populated solely by templates, add this code in the|text=field of theTfd2template but before the text of your rationale:

{{subst:Catfd2|category name}}
III: Notify users. Please notify the creator of the template nominated (as well as the creator of the target template, if proposing a merger). It is helpful to also notify the main contributors of the template that you are nominating. To find them, look in thepage historyortalk pageof the template. Then, add one of the following:

to the talk pages of the template creator (and the creator of theother templatefor a merger) and the talk pages of the main contributors. It is also helpful to make any interestedWikiProjectsaware of the discussion. To do that, make sure the template's talk page is tagged with the banners of any relevant WikiProjects; please consider notifying any of them that do not useArticle alerts.Deletion sorting listsare a possible way of doing that.

Multiple templates:There is no template for notifying an editor about a multiple-template nomination: please write a personal message in these cases.

Consider adding any templates you nominate for TfD to your watchlist. This will help ensure that the TfD tag is not removed.

After nominating: Notify interested projects and editors

[edit]

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

To encourage participation by less experienced editors, please 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 thecriterionthat it meets.

[edit]

WikiProjectsare 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'sArticle Alertsautomatically, if theysubscribe to the system.For instance, tagging a template with{{WikiProject Physics}}will list the discussion inWikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Article alerts.

Notifying substantial contributors to the template

[edit]

While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify thegood-faithcreator and any main contributors of the template and its talkpage that you are nominating for discussion. To find the creator and main contributors, look in thepage historyortalk page.

At this point, you've done all you need to do as nominator. Sometime after seven days have passed, someone else will either close the discussion or, where needed, "relist"it for another seven days of discussion. (That" someone "may notbe you, the nominator.)

Once you have submitted a template here, no further action is necessary on your part. If the nomination is successful it will be added to theHolding Celluntil 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.

Also, consider adding any templates you nominate to your watchlist. This will help ensure that your nomination tag is not mistakenly or deliberately removed.

Twinkle

[edit]

Twinkleis a convenient tool that can perform many of the posting and notification functions automatically, with fewer errors and missed steps than manual editing. To use Twinkle, click its dropdown menu in the toolbar in the top right of the page: TW,and then click 'XFD'.

Note that Twinkle does not notify WikiProjects, although many of them haveautomatic alerts.It is helpful to notify any interested WikiProjects that don't receive alerts, but this has to be done manually.

Discussion

[edit]

Anyone can join the discussion, but please understand thedeletion policyand explain your reasoning.

People will sometimes also recommendsubstorsubst and deleteand similar. This means the template text should be "merged" into the articles that use it. Depending on the content, the template page 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 atWikipedia:Templates for discussion/Old unclosed discussions.

Closing discussion

[edit]

Administrators should read theclosing instructionsbefore closing a nomination. Note thatWP:XFDclosersemi-automates this process and ensures all of the appropriate steps are taken.

Current discussions

[edit]

February 27

[edit]

Template:Social media post

[edit]

Unused fork ofTemplate:Tweet.The only functionality this adds to the standard{{Quote}}and{{Quote box}}is to add decorative logos and mimic the appearance of posts on external websites, which is contrary toMOS:CONFORM.– Joe(talk)08:00, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 26

[edit]

Template:Charred Walls of the Damned

[edit]

No notable releases.--woodensuperman16:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bad (album)

[edit]

All the articles in this template can already be found inTemplate:Michael Jackson songsandTemplate:Michael Jackson,making this template unnecessary.TenthAvenueFreezeOut(talk)09:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KeepThis template provides a better navigation to the songs of the album "Bad" than the listing of songs organized by decade.The Bannertalk21:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,✗plicit14:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Unguided

[edit]

Album link is (now) a redirect to the band. Cipher System article does not mention this band (Cipher System is mentioned in the Unguided's article, but only because of one shared member). Neither link is particularly valuable, and even if they were, there wouldn't be enough to justify the template's existence.QuietHere(talk|contributions)01:33, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Deleteper nom. Does not provide any meaningful navigation.WP:NENAN.
--woodensuperman13:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coord/doc/Transwiki guide

[edit]

This doc sub page hasn't been updated since it was wrote in 2014 and is very much out of sync with the code. If this is still something that is wanted, it probably better fits as a Help: namespace page.Gonnym(talk)10:04, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It should just be written to not mention any line numbers, which has now been done.Snævar(talk)15:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,✗plicit00:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox translation

[edit]

Unused but also shouldn't be used. One of the written-works related infobox should be used instead. The example usesOdyssey (George Chapman translation),which works completely fine with{{Infobox book}}.If anything is missing from that template, it should be proposed on its talk page.Gonnym(talk)17:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't think the infobox needs the many additional parameters this one added, such as text examples. The infobox summarizes the article, it's not meant to replace it.Gonnym(talk)17:38, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not done creating this template yet, it's still a work in progress, and I intend on removing the unnecessary params. ―Howard•🌽3317:41, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,✗plicit00:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 25

[edit]

Template:Thrill Pill

[edit]

One album and one song. No additional aid in navigation.WP:NENAN.StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me20:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Juggernaut

[edit]

No notable releases.WP:NENAN--woodensuperman16:41, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Negligence (band)

[edit]

Two albums.WP:NENAN--woodensuperman16:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Angkor Wat

[edit]

Onlt two albums with articles to their name, the other links are "related", so navbox not warranted.WP:NENAN--woodensuperman16:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.It does satisfy the five links requirement even if you ignore most "related" links (band itself, Denny Lohner, two albums, and related band Skrew - Angkor Wat is effectively the direct predecessor band to it). If the consensus is to delete, merge its contents intoTemplate:Skrewfor the direct predecessor reason.DemocracyDeprivationDisorder(talk)17:14, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With only two notable albums and one notable member, there are only three viable links, the "related" section is unnecessary filler.--woodensuperman08:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you consider it unnecessary, then as mentioned you can opt to merge its contents into Skrew's template given the existing member overlap.
To use a comparison, this is effectively that of Maroon 5 with their 1997 albumThe Fourth World,as their predecessor band Kara's Flowers).DemocracyDeprivationDisorder(talk)10:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Émile Waldteufel

[edit]

Only two appropriate links (the "related" is tangential) -WP:NENAN--woodensuperman15:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep— seems helpful for readers to have an easy way to navigate between the works we have articles on. Presumably more articles will be written and then added. Not sure why this random essay now has a hold over policy rationales. What exactly is the "negative" / "down-side" here?Aza24(talk)04:50, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Jewel of Seven Stars

[edit]

Propose mergingTemplate:The Jewel of Seven StarswithTemplate:Bram Stoker.
I think we could happily merge this into a separate "Adaptations" section, expanding into adaptations of other works (Shadow Builder,Bram Stoker's Burial of the Rats,etc.), but avoiding the multitude of indirect Dracula adaptations.--woodensuperman12:09, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there some way of linking theDraculaadaptations into the 'Adaptations' section of the navbox as well, without listing them individually (probably a link to the [[Dracula in popular culture page?). Thanks.Randy Kryn(talk)12:14, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I wondered about an "adaptions of Dracula" link... Or we could include adaptations that aredirectlybased on the source material, i.e.Dracula(1958 film),but notNosferatu(unless there are still too many or too much duplication).--woodensuperman12:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, although many if not most of the classic films have direct elements of the book (although many parasitic films just used the name 'Dracula' as a come-on to buy a ticket). Listing all of the films which would rate being adaptations may require too many for the navbox, which is whyDracula in popular culturecovers films and other entertainment forms.Randy Kryn(talk)13:23, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I happy if we link toDracula in popular culturein an "adaptations" section and maybe include a hidden note to editors explaining why we're not listing adaptations of that work.--woodensuperman13:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • OpposeGenerally, I don't truly believe that film adaptations belong in a novelist's navbox and are better presented in a template for the work they are relevant to. In this case, we have a well-established navbox that does not have any adaptations shoehorned into it. The vast majority of adaptations are related to Dracula, which has a separate elaborate navbox. I don't think people come to the Stoker article or template seeking information regarding his adaptations. If the do, they are probably looking for information on Dracula. The people who would be served by this set of adaptations are people who are probably focused on Jewel of the Seven Stars content. Merging that content with a bunch of other random articles irrelevant to them is not a helpful navigation configuration.-TonyTheTiger(T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD)17:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:8TeamBracket-2Elim-PlayIn

[edit]

Unused sports bracket.Gonnym(talk)09:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2026 SA20 table

[edit]

Unused sports table templates that were created too early, years in advance. Articles have been redirected for the same reason.Gonnym(talk)09:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NITron

[edit]

Navigational template without linksFram(talk)08:41, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleteper nom. /RemoveRedSky[talk] [gb]14:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 24

[edit]

Template:Foreign relations of the Syrian Opposition

[edit]

Duplicates the main FR template of Syria and only three links. No articles of direct bilateral or multilateral exist for the opposition. Nor should it because all relations are just for Syria no matter if its the opposition or previous regime.WikiCleanerMan(talk)15:20, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LaTavia Roberson

[edit]

No articles. Useless for navigation.--woodensuperman14:33, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2024 Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year

[edit]

No evidence that there even was a team of the yearThe Bannertalk02:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: A quick Google search of "2024 Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year" resulted in a link to the following article -Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year 2024.Thus proving the existence of the Team of the Year in question. I have added reference to the template.CorkMantalk11:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A template is not an article. But there is no article2024 Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Yearnor does the article2024 Joe McDonagh Cupmentions the team in any shape or form.The Bannertalk12:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please click on these external links...Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year 2024andOffaly and Laois dominate Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year with 12 players selected between them.One of these is an online report on the GAA's own website actually announcing the Team of the Year in 2024. The team can be added to the2024 Joe McDonagh Cuppage if it helps?CorkMantalk23:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,✗plicit13:58, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hammarby IF sections

[edit]

In theory redundant toTemplate:Hammarby IF– two links, "Football Feeder (Men's)" and "Ice Hockey (historic)", may be added to the latter. See alsoWikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2023 September 9#Template:Djurgårdens IF sections.Kaffet i halsen(talk)12:22, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keepthere's no actual rationale given for this at all, and Djurgårdens IF template was completely different and to be honest, the discussion was hastily closed with not much discussion at all.Abcmaxx(talk)15:11, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Contemporary rulers in reign of Robert III of Scotland

[edit]

Similar to the succession boxes below; can't be used much, if at all. Also the only of these sorts.Omnis Scientia(talk)09:11, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Succession boxes of James I of Scotland

[edit]

These can only be used once each. Best to put the succession boxes directly in the article and delete the navigational boxes.Omnis Scientia(talk)09:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Location map/data/Taiwan Kaohsiung

[edit]

Duplicate ofModule:Location map/data/Kaohsiung.All uses in articles have been replaced.Johnj1995(talk)02:43, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:University of Strathclyde faculties

[edit]

Unused and no longer needed as the main Template:University of Strathclyde has all the same links.WikiCleanerMan(talk)00:40, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 23

[edit]

Template:Kabaddibox

[edit]

Propose mergingTemplate:KabaddiboxwithTemplate:Kabaddiresult.
Pretty much the same templates, with some fields missing in one or the other. They could be merged without loss of functionality.—CX Zoom[he/him](let's talk• {C•X})14:41, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cork Minor Football Team 1985

[edit]

WP:NENANSecond nomination, as the first one failed due to technical issues.The Bannertalk03:55, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2023 Club Hurling Team of the Year

[edit]

No own article. No mention in the given back link.The Bannertalk02:48, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2020 GAA Minor Star Awards Hurling Team of the Year

[edit]

No own article. No mention of the team in the present back link.The Bannertalk02:45, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 22

[edit]

Template:Local file

[edit]

Propose mergingTemplate:Local filewithTemplate:Keep local.
These seem to fit the same use-case, and the wordings are nearly identical. The only difference seems to be the rarely-used{{Local file}}"file mayor may notbe available on Wikimedia Commons "vs the widely-used{{Keep local}}"file may be..." (underlined words omitted). Doesn't the word "may" simply state a possibility (and therefore the opposite is also possible), as opposed to the definitely-true word "is"?DMacks(talk)22:21, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If they are both to be kept, then Local file needs specific documentation of its independent use-case, and I would also propose that it be renamed to clarify the difference.DMacks(talk)06:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
DMacks,I created it IIRC because I couldn't suppress the file link in{{Keep local}}.As the files didn't exist on Commons when I used the tag, I found it confusing to have the template link a non-existent file. Or worse, someone might upload a different file to Commons in the future with the same filename.
It seemed easier to just create a new template, but the functionality can indeed be merged. In{{Keep local/sandbox}}there's now a version that accepts "unknown" as the first parameter to suppress the file link and change the wording. Would you find that acceptable?—Alexis Jazz(talkor ping me)06:32, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely no objection to a flag to change behavior if there really is a desired behavior variant. They seem so close, with minor wording differences that seem to have the same meaning to obscure what might be an actual difference of behavior. Doesn't what you want require manually keeping track of whether something of that name gets added or deleted on commons? The whole situation that someone might upload a different file to commons is an intractible result of having any local file, made possibly even more likely when the subject is one that does have free files (therefore made worse by keep-local of free files). It's a shame red-vs-bluelink doesn't work cross-site! I stumbled upon Local file while looking for a function to determine whether a file is local (I think we have threeish variants of that test in different places, so I was also looking for an obvious name to consolidate them). While it's not too hard to test whether a filename exists locally on enwiki, I don't see a way to test whether a filenameq that exists locally on enwiki also exists on commons.DMacks(talk)06:58, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see a way to test whether a filenameq that exists locally on enwiki also exists on commons.
To the best of my knowledge that's impossible in wikitext. Red-vs-bluelink not working cross-site is part of the reason I created this template. The blue link couldn't be suppressed, so users would expect to see a copy on Commons when clicking it.
This could maybe be somewhat improved by having the "unknown" parameter I proposed and the creation of a bot that inserts it in files with the template where the link to Commons is dead. In that case it could also adjust the categorization.
This being said: back when I created it, there was this file (File:Fred Ott Sneeze 1894 remastered.gif/File:Fred Ott Sneeze 1894 remastered.webm) that I thought I might improve further in the future, but I couldn't maintain it on Commons. As this is no longer an obstacle, I'll remove the template from those files.—Alexis Jazz(talkor ping me)13:51, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The template for files that should be kept locally and not moved to commons is{{Esoteric file}}.Does that cover your use case?Chew(V•T•E)20:43, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Chew,not really. The file is useful on other projects. Uploading improved versions ofthe file(+GIF) on Commons was not an option at the time, so I needed to have the file locally in case someone would copy the file to Commons. But it hadn't been copied to Commons (yet), nor could I do that, nor could I request that. So the file link from{{Keep local}}was inevitably a red link in disguise, which I found very confusing. So I created this new template. The situation has changed since and the template is no longer needed for my files.
Other files using{{Keep local}}with a red link in disguise probably exist, but looking at it now, the template I created is probably not the best way to handle those. So I don't oppose deleting{{Local file}}.—Alexis Jazz(talkor ping me)09:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,Plastikspork―Œ(talk)15:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Horse latitudes coordinates

[edit]

Thenavboxis only used on one page (Horse latitudes). The usefulness of this navbox since its creation in 2012 is questionable to where I don't think it can be merged to the horse latitudes article. –The Grid(talk)14:41, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.These articles on latitudes usually show{{geographical coordinates}}.For theHorse latitudes,that template doesn’t show the article topic, so I made a special derivative template. What does the nom propose? To go back to the general template, or drop it completely? Their proposal doesn’t seem thought through.SmokeyJoe(talk)02:08, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteThe lead section and image are already clear enough. –LaundryPizza03(dc̄)22:00, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So, should{{geographical coordinates}}be removed from other latitudes articles?SmokeyJoe(talk)12:05, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,Plastikspork―Œ(talk)15:19, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Talk:One Direction

[edit]

I believe this template is no longer required because all 5 members of One Direction are now in the 'Past Members' section.MadGuy7023(talk)17:51, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,Plastikspork―Œ(talk)15:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Conservatism in Formosa

[edit]

The newly created Conservatism in Formosa template has no basis and should be deleted because it inaccurately groups together political movements that do not share a common conservative tradition. The term "Formosa" is rarely used in contemporary political discourse, making the template’s framing unclear and misleading. Additionally, lumping together pro-Beijing parties (such as the Chinese Unification Promotion Party) with Taiwanese nationalist parties (such as the Taiwan Statebuilding Party) ignores their fundamentally opposing ideologies, as mentioned in third opinion. Pro-Beijing groups seek unification with the PRC, while Taiwanese nationalist parties advocate for a distinct Taiwanese identity, often opposing both the PRC and the ROC frameworks.

Furthermore, a well-established Conservatism in Taiwan template already exists, accurately representing conservatism in Taiwan as aligned with the Pan-Blue Camp, which upholds the Republic of China (ROC) identity and has historically been anti-communist. This existing template correctly reflects the mainstream conservative tradition in Taiwan, which is rooted in preserving ROC institutions rather than promoting PRC-aligned or Taiwanese independence ideologies.Guotaian(talk)09:39, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete.This is practically an exact copy of the Conservatism in China page. This fork is really unnecssary.GuardianH23:35, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    No, this is never template for 'fork' purposes. There is a need for a template within Taiwan that deals with anti-Pan-Blue conservatives, namely pro-Beijing far-right conservatives, pro-independence Taiwanese nationalist conservatives, and pro-Japanese conservatives before 1945. The real problem is Guotaian's devastating POV editing. Although I'm a KMT supporter, I don't deny the existence of anti-KMT anti-ROC Taiwanese conservatism. However, Guotaian is claimed to be "Conservatism in Taiwan" only when he supports ROC identity.ProKMT(talk)07:19, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deleteper nomination. --WikiCleanerMan(talk)18:20, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2023 GAA Rising Stars Hurling Team

[edit]

No idea where this team is coming from. No own article, no mention in the article about the Fitzgibbon Cup.The Bannertalk03:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 21

[edit]

Template:2017 Rugby League Qualifiers table

[edit]

not needed, all articles are transcluding from the main2017 Super 8sarticleFrietjes(talk)22:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject U.S. Roads/U.S. Route 66 task force

[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/U.S. Route 66is a task force ofWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads.Task forces shouldn't use a separate banner template and instead should use their parent project's banner. The banner already includes this task force parameter:{{WikiProject U.S. Roads|type=US66}}.Gonnym(talk)13:53, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose—there are articles that are only pertinent to the task force that are not pertinent to the rest of the project. For example, USRD itself will not assess/track/tag the historic sites along US 66 like gas stationsbecause they are not roads,but the US 66 TF would track thembecause they are related to the general history of US Route 66.It is for exactly that reason that the separate banner was created.Imzadi 1979→00:44, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't find that distinction compelling, given that this banner is used on less than 130 pages.Gonnym(talk)11:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The task force exists as a collaboration between USRD and the US History project. It needs a way to track its articles, and some of its articles are going to be outside of the scope of USRD, its nominal host project. Therefore, the banner exists. If the banner is deleted, the tracking capability of the task force will be affected when those 130 articles are removed from the task force categories. Those are simple facts. The banner has a use, and it does not violate policy. Therefore, there are no grounds to delete it. Thus, it should stay.Imzadi 1979→23:46, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,✗plicit14:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment:task forces are usually subgroups of a project, so it seems strange that there are task force articles which aren't of interest to the parent project. maybe there should be an additional parameter like|US66-non-road=yor|US66-only=yto prevent articles using|type=US66from being categorized with the road articles?Frietjes(talk)18:56, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Schizophrenic DALY Rates

[edit]

No longer used. (It is currently transcluded to one user page but predates that user's activity by 10 years.) –FayenaticLondon12:52, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Aviation accidents and incidents in Senegal

[edit]

Only two links to articles, not enough to merit a template.DemocracyDeprivationDisorder(talk)12:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Historically female work

[edit]
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'stalk pageor in adeletion review).

The result of the discussion wasspeedy deleteper G5SmartSE(talk)15:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is at best going to be an unmaintainable mess with significant NPOV issues. The problem is what is considered historically female work is going to vary massively by area and time even within the same country. For example in some areas of the UK basically any non technical coal mining job other than getter would have been considered work for women and girls. In others women hardly featured underground. Then it was made literally illegal for women to work underground. So depending on the areahurrierhistorically female work, never female work or work up until it was made illegal.

This means there is a lot of stuff where its inclusion or lack of inclusion will create POV issues. Size is also an issue. Woman have done a vast range of work over the centuries.©Geni(talk)06:10, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need to be derided by you! I welcome all contributions that better refine what is and what is not historically female work by area and time. I think the intention of the template is clear, cover work that is associated with womanhood, often stigmatisingly so.Réalgard(talk)12:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should start with creating the articleHistorically female workto tie this navigation template together. With that article in place, we can start to talk about the content of the template.The Bannertalk13:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The creator is a blatant sock ofLau737(talk·contribs·deleted contribs·logs·filter log·block user·block log)so I will G5.SmartSE(talk)15:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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'stalk pageor in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Full party name with color (parenthesis)

[edit]

Seemingly unused and invokes a function in a nonexistent moduleModule:Party name with color (parenthesis). Contacted creator of the page on their user talk and have not heard back after 3-4 days. ~Rustymeow~04:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:this can probably be G7'ed, see[1]~Rustymeow~00:26, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Club Hurling Silver Jubilee Team

[edit]

No article about the team, so any navigation would hang in the air.The Bannertalk02:34, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


February 20

[edit]

Template:Assumed license

[edit]

As of last week, we are officially complete! All uploads without an explicit copyright license have been either claimed or deleted. Any new uploads fall after the cutoff date, so we are all set to delete this template.HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)05:47, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you SURE that no uploads prior to the cut-off date remain? If the template has completed it's function than I have no objections to redundant templates being archived. If deleted however, I would appreciate a "file copy" being retained in my userspace.ShakespeareFan00(talk)09:32, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding was that this was systemically added to any file which did not have an appropriate license. If this is a "add it when you find a problem" tag, then I would withdraw this nomination and request a bot add it everywhere to allow the cleanup to continue. Best,HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)23:14, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ShakespeareFan00:ping. Best,HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)22:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,Primefac(talk)22:58, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KeepShooting down this template straight after it is supposed to have become superfluous is quite risky.Murphy's lawand so.The Bannertalk02:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024–25 Vijay Hazare Trophy Group tables

[edit]

unused after being merged with the parent article with attributionFrietjes(talk)20:27, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2024 Chhattisgarh Cricket Premier League Points table

[edit]

unused, unclear if there is a parent article.Frietjes(talk)20:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2021 NBL–Philippines season standings

[edit]

unused after being merged with the parent article with attribution.Frietjes(talk)20:25, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2020 Philippines Football League table

[edit]

this was forked from the main article and subsequently merged back, so no longer needed as a separate template.Frietjes(talk)20:24, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby League Four Nations Ladders

[edit]

these have all been merged with the parent articles with attribution.Frietjes(talk)20:21, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

No transclusions. This tiny navigation helper is no longer needed after the linked templates were sensibly merged into{{WritersGuildofAmericaAnthologyAnyLength}}.–Jonesey95(talk)20:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Use Bangladeshi English

[edit]
  1. This template claims that it is for "articles which haveBangladeshi Englishspelling ", but the Bangladeshi English article says that" Bangladeshi English is an English accent "and makes no claims about any spelling differences between Bangladeshi English and English as spoken or written in other countries.
  2. Templates providing editing guidance should not make unsupported claims or recommendations.
  3. Even if there are differences in vocabulary or word usage in Bangladeshi English, we should not use these local terms, phrases, or constructions unannotated in English Wikipedia articles, per theMOS guideline about using vocabulary common to all varieties of English,so the template provides guidance that is contrary to MOS. As such, this template is not useful or usable on the English Wikipedia (this isWP:TFD#REASONS,number 3). –Jonesey95(talk)15:17, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete:I am unable to find any Bangladeshi English dictionaries or style guides. The closest I can find isPocket Oxford English Dictionary South Asia EditionISBN9780198700982.Perhaps we should create a new template for South Asian English? ―Howard•🌽3320:08, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment:The same would likely apply to EngVar templates such as (I'm guessing)Template:Use Hong Kong EnglishorTemplate:Use Antiguan and Barbudan English.Thus, I will suggest that, if such templates are deleted, they should be replaced with a newTemplate:Use Commonwealth English.It would make sense to me if we delete the templates for all English variants that do not have dictionaries or style guides.— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk|contribs)22:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    With all respect, I'm sure you mean well, but I think it might be best to focus this discussion about this template only. If you have ideas about other templates, merges, and deletions, I recommend that you readthe TFD for Use Ugandan Englishand theTFD for Use Commonwealth Englishand then start a new discussion in an appropriate venue. –Jonesey95(talk)16:44, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neoauthoritarianism in China

[edit]

The Neoauthoritarianism in China template should be deleted because it duplicates the Conservatism in China template, which already covers PRC conservatism since third opinion confirmed that "China" refers to the PRC.Guotaian(talk)13:38, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppositionandstrong KEEP- A template to unite the 'pro-Beijing' political forces of Mainland China (PRC), Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan (ROC) is essential, and the "Neoauthoritarianism in China" template is currently in charge.ProKMT(talk)07:45, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- The Neoauthoritarianism in China template is largely similar to the Conservatism in China template, which covers largely the same topics as the earlier template.HarukaAmaranth08:31, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If Guotaian promises never to remove non-Beijing camp conservatives (pro-ROC camp and conservative localists) from the "Template:Conservatism in Hong Kong",he may not oppose deletion.ProKMT(talk)10:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The NFL on NBC pregame show

[edit]

WP:PERFNAV--woodensuperman13:08, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TheEarlyShowAnchors

[edit]

WP:PERFNAV--woodensuperman13:03, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ABC News personalities

[edit]

WP:PERFNAV--woodensuperman12:57, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NBCEveningNewsAnchors

[edit]

TextbookWP:PERFNAV--woodensuperman12:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fox News personalities

[edit]

As presenters on a news channel, this failsWP:PERFNAV.--woodensuperman12:55, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Quinn Martin shows

[edit]

PerWP:FILMNAV,only shows where he was the primary creator should be included. I have trimmed the ones where he was executive producer, which leaves two entries.WP:NENAN--woodensuperman09:57, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2023 Joe McDonagh Cup Team of the Year

[edit]

No article on the team, seems to be another "fantasy" team.--woodensuperman09:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP:Far from being a "fantasy" team as you call it, this is actually the official team of the year as announced by the Gaelic Athletic Association (see link here to the official GAA website:Carlow to the fore in Joe McDonagh Team of the Year). While not everything needs a navbox, not every navbox needs an article. Reference to the Team of the Year could be added to the existing2023 Joe McDonagh Cuppage if you think that would help? --CorkMantalk23:54, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are wrong. Every navigation templateneedsan article to show where this is about. And the "team of the year" of a second tier tournament? The notability of that team is highly questionable.The Bannertalk01:58, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mount Leinster Rangers Hurling Team 2014

[edit]

Mostly redlinks, and not a winning team, so not navbox-worthy. We can't have navboxes for every team.--woodensuperman09:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ireland composite rules shinty team 2008

[edit]

No article about this team. No mention of the team inComposite rules shinty–hurlingThe Bannertalk00:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Deleteper nom. We can't have navboxes for every permutation of a team.
--woodensuperman08:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
not even a national team that competed internationally against another national team? --Gaois(talk)15:05, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Old discussions

[edit]

February 19

Template:Ireland composite rules shinty team 2006

[edit]

No article about this team. No mention of the team inComposite rules shinty–hurlingThe Bannertalk23:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship Final Man of the Match

[edit]

Nothing available about the Man of the Match. No article, no mentions in the article All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship. Relevance doubtful.The Bannertalk22:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hurry Up Tomorrow track listing

[edit]

Navigation is redundant to{{The Weeknd songs}}as it as well links to all the songs from the album that have articles.StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me20:34, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, just here to say about the template; I was merely taken in by the previous template made by someone forKamikaze(Eminem's studio album) and I had thought about replicating it for other albums (so I went on to make just that; for Eminem'sThe Marshall Mathers LP 2,and now this; The Weeknd'sHurry Up Tomorrow.Well in hindsight, me purely wanting to add something just werent able to establish myself the realization that it was wholly redundant because... yes, I just added navigation on the infobox itself... Was about to plan on making this template for Eminem's recent album,The Death of Slim Shady,until I received word that all my work was nothing but redundancy.
So if there's anything I can do, well I can make it right (you can ask me toblank it), otherwise, anyone who has the power to delete pages, they have my blessing to remove it.ROBLOXGamingDavid(talk)03:47, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fx Goby

[edit]

Two films.WP:NENAN.--woodensuperman14:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2024 GAA Rising Stars Hurling Team

[edit]

No article about this team. Not mentioned in the given backlink (2024 Fitzgibbon Cup)The Bannertalk14:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: I have added a Team of the Year section (see2024 Fitzgibbon Cup#Team of the Year) and put in a suitable link on teh Template.CorkMantalk16:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you create low-quality templates about teams without own article or mention, to improve them only after you are called out on it? I leave it to the admins to decide if this team (with no own article) is relevant enough for its own template.The Bannertalk16:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, admittedly, many of the templates are low quality or attract a niche level of interest. Not every template on Wikipedia has a corresponding article of its own. Many templates link to a broader article, particularly when it comes to sporting articles. This has been the case with many of the templates that I created. Over the last few months you have proposed the deletion of many of the templates that I have created over the years. The reason I improved these templates after "being called out" is because I have an interest in preserving these templates. Many have been in existence for many years and offer vital information, albeit to a niche audience. Rather than being "called out", I am merely offering an alternative view to yours as to why the template should not be deleted.CorkMantalk00:12, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:OccupationNationality

[edit]

Single-use template which does no computation. Wikitext is more understandable if we don't use this template. Therefore, subst and delete this self-operating napkin.HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)07:11, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:category namespace templates like this are actually much more useful then manual text, as it just requires copy/pasting these into new pages and everything is handled. This specific one is less helpful as it lacks documentation and features.Gonnym(talk)10:37, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree wholeheartedly that in general these templates are helpful. I think this specific one is not.HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)05:08, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,✗plicit14:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neither Neddyseagoon nor CJLL Wright have edited in years. If they were the only ones who used it, it can safely be deleted. Best,HouseBlaster(talk• he/they)23:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 18

Template:LaVeyan Satanism

[edit]

The implication that these other article subjects have anything to do withLaVeyan Satanismviolates BLP and NOR quite egregiously. DoPope Francis,Taylor Swift,andKarl Marxreally have that much in common? ―cobaltcigs20:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment:What is the deletion rationale here? If Taylor Swift doesn't belong in this navbox, editing the navbox is the next step. (From the TFD instructions above:Templates should not be nominated if the issue can be fixed by normal editing.). I have removed many links to people and concepts that do not fit the guidance atWP:NAVBOX.–Jonesey95(talk)01:11, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Any such edit I might make would (incorrectly) suggest I know which links are appropriate to keep, and therefore has a 90% chance of also violating BLP. But I did briefly think about doing that first, yes. ―cobaltcigs17:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,✗plicit00:05, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NAVBOXprovides guidance about which links to keep. I have followed it, reducing the bloat in this navboxquite a bit.Do you still think this navbox should be deleted? If so, please provide a rationale. –Jonesey95(talk)06:42, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 16

Template:Colort/ColorShort

[edit]

Broken template that is unrelated toTemplate:Colortand used only in place ofTemplate:Color swatch.For some reason I cannot get this one to display correctly in dark mode. –LaundryPizza03(dc̄)21:48, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cinema of the State of Palestine

[edit]

Only two links to articles. Minus the fact the main article linked as a redirect. Rest are for categories. No navigation is met with this template.WikiCleanerMan(talk)21:40, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only four links. Still falls shorts after removing links to categories. --WikiCleanerMan(talk)17:59, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiCleanerMan:links to categories are commonly included in similar templates inCategory:Film country navigational boxes.WP:NAVBOXis a section in a page comparing the use of categories, lists and templates to navigate between articles; it does not prohibit links to categories in navboxes. –FayenaticLondon21:00, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Progressive groups in the US

[edit]

Template for a non-existing subject (Progressive groups in the US). And an overly broad scope.The Bannertalk14:45, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to{{Progressivism sidebar}}here?Tule-hog(talk)19:09, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
actually it isTemplate:New DemocratsSm8900(talk)20:08, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Should the template instead be named{{New Democrats navbox}}?Otherwise the current name implies a focus on the blanket topicProgressivism in the United States.Tule-hog(talk)21:10, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ok, sure i can rename it to{{New Democrats topics}}.is that ok with everyone? by the way, the word "topics" is a consistent term to use in a navbox title; the word "navbox" would generally not be in the title.Sm8900(talk)03:42, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As long as it refers to an existing article, it is fine to me.The Bannertalk12:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the article link is on the first line. but i can add it in the title as well.

--Sm8900(talk)15:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 15

Template:Conservatism in China

[edit]

I believe the Conservatism in China template should be deleted because its scope is already covered by more specific templates:

Redundant with "Neoauthoritarianism in China" – This template already addresses conservative ideologies in the PRC, which makes a separate Conservatism in China template unnecessary.

Hong Kong and Taiwan Have Their Own Templates – Since conservatism in Hong Kong and Taiwan has distinct characteristics, separate templates already exist for them. This ensures better clarity and avoids unnecessary overlap.

By keeping more specific templates, we maintain a clearer and more organized structure without duplicating content.Guotaian(talk)09:28, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose/Keep.This template covers various Chinese conservatives, including mainland ROC conservatism before 1949 and Falun Gong. The reason for the existence ofTemplate:Modern liberalism USis not the reason whyTemplate:Liberalism USshould be deleted.ProKMT(talk)10:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The difference betweenConservatism in China templateandNeoauthoritarianism in China templateis not the same as the distinction betweenModern liberalism in the United StatesandLiberalism in the United States.
In the case of China,Conservatism in China templatecovers the entire Greater China region, including thePRC,Hong Kong,andTaiwan,whileNeoauthoritarianism in Chinais specific to thePRC.Conservatism in China includes different political movements withingreater china.In Hong Kong, conservatism is closely tied to thepro-Beijing camp,while in Taiwan, it has historically been associated with theKuomintang(KMT) and its opposition to rapid political and social liberalization.
In contrast, the distinction between Modern liberalism in the United States and Liberalism in the United States is based on ideological differences rather than geographical scope. Modern liberalism refers to a specific branch of liberalism that emphasizes government intervention in the economy, social justice, and progressive policies. Liberalism in the United States, however, is a broader category that also includes classical liberalism, libertarianism, and other ideological traditions. Unlike the Chinese case, where Neoauthoritarianism is a regional subset of a broader ideology, Modern liberalism and Liberalism in the U.S. are conceptually distinct, justifying the need for separate classifications.Guotaian(talk)10:35, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Neoauthoritarianism in ChinaandTemplate:Conservatism in Taiwando not include thepre-1949 mainland Chinese conservatism.For example,pro-Qing royalism,Chiangismbefore 1945,Dai Jitao Thought,Western Hills Groupwas not related to Taiwanese conservatism or Neoauthoritarianism.ProKMT(talk)01:58, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The template is a random smorgasbord of amalgamated links based on seemingly nothing save the opinion of it's editor. Although I asked on its page, I'll ask again: what is Dong Zhongshu doing here? Confucianism was not dominant until it was established as a state orthodoxy. So how can he be a conservative? Because Confucianism claims to regurgitate the Zhou? Is that true? I don't know. Do you know? Does this guy know?FourLights(talk)13:00, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
what was "Legalism" Shang Yang and Han Fei conservative in relation to? Shang Yang was a radical reformer who attacked the aristocracy in favour of monarch and state. Is that conservative?FourLights(talk)13:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neoconservatism is not "conservative" in the traditional sense, but it belongs to American conservatism. Confucianism and Legalism obviously belong to Chinese conservatism.ProKMT(talk)02:00, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
After third opinion was provided on the overall topicWikipedia_talk:WikiProject_China#Political_ideology_templates,this template has been changed and there is no need for deletion. However, theneoauthoritarianism templateshould now be considered for deletion.Guotaian(talk)13:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keepand revert back to old content
  1. Conservatism in ROC, HKSAR and pre-1949 China SHOULD be on this template
  2. Tonnes of new stuff is not "conservatism" but purely anti chinese stuff that for whatever reason wikipedia deems as real
  3. Many other similar templates
  4. Merge conservatism in HKSAR and ROC templates into one single template
Thehistorianisaac(talk)17:48, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this but delete the Neoauthoritarianism template

This is the more general template. I recognize it's got scope overlap with HK and Taiwan but, if we're going to keep one, it shouldn't be the one pertaining to a single ideology.Simonm223(talk)02:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose the deletion of the Neoauthoritarianism template in any case. In a similar case, there is aChinese New Left template.ProKMT(talk)03:02, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
New left make sense as there is no other template for left-wing ideology in China (PRC) but conservatism has 2 different templates.Guotaian(talk)11:51, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agreeSimonm223.However, we should instead rename the Neoauthoritarianism template to the conservatism in china template and remove the current conservatism in china template.Guotaian(talk)13:02, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That would be fine too. I just think the conservatism in PRC template should be appropriately named and not over-specific.Simonm223(talk)14:11, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neoauthoritarianism does not represent all the conservatism in the PRC (seeCultural conservatism#China,Social conservatism#China;social/cultural conservatives are not necessarily neo-authoritarians). Also, I am strongly opposed to leaving out the entire Greater China area in the "Conservatism in China" template and only dealing with the neoauthoritarianism in the PRC. Pro-Beijing politics in Hong Kong / Macau / Taiwan (Pro-Beijing camp (Hong Kong)/Pro-Beijing camp (Macau)/ Taiwan's "far-right"Chinese Unification Promotion Party,Patriot Alliance Association) and Pro-ROC politics in Hong Kong / mainland PRC should also be included in the template "Conservatism in China".ProKMT(talk)10:13, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Completed discussions

[edit]

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

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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion&oldid=1273714158"