I note that {{West Midlands railway stations}} segregates categories by means of collapsible sections. Is there a method of having such a navbox in a page so that the relevant section is shown uncollapsed with the others all collapsed, without expecting the user to go for show/hide links? --Redrose64 (talk) 12:11, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
hello,Some of the pages related to Hinduism are so long that navigation becomes somewhat tough when one is at the near end of article(one need to again come to top for navigation from the first template).Instead this template helps for this.also the construction of this template took me hours of work.and regarding maintenance i assure that i will be responsible for maintenance.also you can see all the religions Buddhism,Sikhism and many more have dual templates.so please i request you not to delete the template considering the ease of navigation and all other factors.thank you - SunilShamnurtalk06:45, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Convert to Navbox - There is a purpose for this template, as other navies have navboxes at the end of their articles to link to shared subject articles which are also covered under the categories at the end of the article as well. As for lack of usage, then it only needs to be implemented properly. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/keep to let editors decide if they prefer a sidebar or a footer. (use a switch, "sidebar=yes"/"footer=yes" depending on which name you activate. )65.93.14.196 (talk) 05:15, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This template groups together small settlements in the electoral ward of Boxford. This is a highly unlikely grouping for users to require, outside of the context of Babergh District Council. The existence of Template:Babergh, which contains all of these settlements, measn that the Boxford template is just a duplication of information, and is overtemplating. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 11:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unused external link template. Providing links to weather sites is probably not useful, but that is almost beside the point - this template is unused, period/full stop. — This, that, and the other (talk)11:00, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I BOLDly userfied {{Watchlistlink}}, because there was only one user of it. The creator of that template (who is now retired) created these, which are just permutations of the one I userfied. No-one at all appears to use these, so they can be deleted. (The sole transclusion of {{Watchlistlink3}} is in a discussion, and is not a real use.) — This, that, and the other (talk)10:34, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
keep and use since several templates came up for deletion recently from Mhiji were claimed as unused because they were substitution templates, obviously there is a need for this. 64.229.103.232 (talk) 05:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unnecessary, as a table of contents with the correct links to the headings is included automatically in the article. If the headings need to be simplified this should be done in the article instead of a second TOC. Peter E. James (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unused. I don't really understand Marvel Comics, but I believe that their characters often appear in multiple comic series. I think this one has a bit of overlap with X-Men. That, and the fact that the main topic of this box only has a subsection of an article to itself, suggests we don't need this anymore. — This, that, and the other (talk)06:52, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unused. I'm not sure quite what this does (the documentation is in Germlish), but we have a complete, working set of election templates that does not involve this one. — This, that, and the other (talk)06:48, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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). No further edits should be made to this section.
Sure, go ahead and delete it, if you have administrative rights. It's my oldest attempt to organize the contents of this page, which is becoming larger as I add more and more items, and was badly in need of a contents table. Also, as you pointed out, I've already replaced it with {{sftvpr}}. But I don't see the reason behind your assessment to delete {{sftvpr}}. Just tell me what's wrong with it, and I'll adjust it accordingly, if it's breaking any wiki policies. Thanks for listening. MDGx☹☺06:21, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that message. I'll speedy delete this template. The problem with List of science fiction television programs is that it has no less than three contents lists - a navbar, a category-like TOC panel, and a navbox. {{sftvpr}} is a misuse of a navbox (see WP:NAVBOX). As for the others, I am wondering why a normal standard Table of Contents can't be used - I've tried it out in preview, and it seems to work fine (apart from the unfortunate alphabetical headings... but that's a minor concern). I suggest you reconsider your use of non-standard ToC elements in that article. Thanks, — This, that, and the other (talk)06:38, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep. Attack pages are covered by Wikipedia:Attack page. This is distinguished from Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Attack pages are actually a NPOV issue, usually. So the case could be made to redirect to the uw-npov series, but this may be a situation in which the specific warning is necessary. Redirecting to db-notice isn't a workable result because speedy deletion isn't always the remedy, or the warning may follow the execution of the deletion, rendering the advice in the db-notice useless. The template should be formatted for uw and kept as a separate template. --Bsherr (talk) 18:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a hatnote, spacing and punctuation & grammar is very sensitive, and in general, the introduction of a page can well be written manually. The template does add nothing. I have removed four from disambiguation-pages. DePiep (talk) 01:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hatnote. Produces the text Did you mean PAGE2?, which has the wrong tone for a reader. I could replace all ~15 uses with a {{distinguish}}or{{for}}, with more neutral language. In general, I don't think we want to address a reader this way. DePiep (talk) 01:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is that what the external google-gadget on the talkpage is about? I do not see a link with this template, looks like in another situation (search). -DePiep (talk) 11:32, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. 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). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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). No further edits should be made to this section.
