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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
Unused, no documentation. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 08:19, 6 June 2017 (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).
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).
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).
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).
Unused. Use {{Globalize|2=North Korea}}. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 08:18, 6 June 2017 (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).
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).
Unused. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 08:17, 6 June 2017 (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).
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).
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).
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).
Unused. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 08:14, 6 June 2017 (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).
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).
Unused. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 08:11, 6 June 2017 (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).
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).
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).
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).
Only ever substituted three times. Overly specific policy violation; could be redirected to {{uw-vandalism4}}. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 10:24, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 00:45, 6 June 2017 (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).
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).
Only 4 transclusions. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 10:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This template (through Designation/colour, Designation/text, and Designation/divbox) is used all over the place; for starters, it's used to show the designation in every article using Template:Infobox NRHP, which is used in thousands of articles. TheCatalyst31Reaction•Creation 01:21, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep As above, this template is used within Template:Infobox historic site which is transcluded on over 5K articles. It may not be something directly used in articles but it supports other templates which are. Incidentally, the Infobox NRHP mentioned above is used on over 61K articlesKerry (talk) 06:20, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 00:44, 6 June 2017 (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).
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).
Oppose: Is Jc86035 personally ready to manually convert the more than 150 entries that use this template? What does the other template "buy" us to be worth the effort that if he wants it deleted, he should make? When Jc86035 has gone to every single place that uses this template and converted all of them to the "preferred" one, then I have no objection. But I must strongly object to anything that could break other pages or templates. He wants to drop this template, he needs to edit everything else that uses it, first. Then he can argue it's superfluous. Besides, this one might be easier to use or provide a better feature set than the one with which he wants to replace it. Until it is proven superfluous because its use has been replaced by the person objecting - he wants it removed, he needs to repair all the places it's used - I say "no, no, a thousand times no!" Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 16:16, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 00:36, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment All of the mainspace transclusions are gone now. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 14:29, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete, as far as I can tell it was only being used in Template:Infobox U.S. county, where I replaced it. also, a bad name since other countries have states. Frietjes (talk) 14:36, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as badly named, and in the interest of standardization. AWB is a wonderful thing. —swpbT 12:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant, badly named as other countries have states, and in the interest of standardisation. Luis150902 (talk | contribs) 07:10, 8 June 2017 (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).
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).
The result of the discussion was delete. It looks like the main use is in the jct templates, so I will move it to a subpage of that template for now (which also matches Module:Jct/statename). It doesn't look like 'ISO 3166-2/US' is a drop-in replacement in all cases since this template also provides names of Canadian provinces. Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 01:26, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose—no need to combine everything, and frankly the other name is non-intuitive. Imzadi 1979→ 10:16, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Imzadi1979: It doesn't really matter if its name is unintuitive, since it shouldn't be used on its own in articles. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 10:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Unless Jc86035 states that he's willing to convert ALL of the other pages that use this template - and I stopped when the count was more than 5,000 - I oppose for the simple fact we have no business breaking all those pages for no benefit. Why take on all this extra work? When (s)he is ready to promise to manually convert, and then has manually converted, in excess of five thousand pages, then come back and argue it's unnecessary. Again I say no, because this is another case where he never even bothered to check the 'what links here' page and see how many pages would be broken by his proposal. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 16:25, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Rfc1394: It's only used in 34 template pages, so they can all be gone through with AWB find/replace in a few minutes regardless of what template is used to replace it, be it {{Country abbreviation}}or{{ConvertAbbrev}} or whatever. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 17:38, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 00:36, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete, assuming there are no problems with replacement. this is a bad name for a template, since (1) it includes Canadian provinces, and (2) there are countries other than the United States with states. Frietjes (talk) 15:01, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as badly named, and in the interest of standardization. AWB is a wonderful thing. —swpbT 12:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, swpb and Frietjes: the template is redundant and has a bad name as there are countries other than the United States with states. All transclusions and links in documentation can be replaced easily. Luis150902 (talk | contribs) 14:11, 7 June 2017 (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).
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).
Only used in other templates' documentation. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 09:58, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the very reason you want to remove it: it's a documentation page and we desperately need documentation of templates. Now, again, if you want to rename it to a documentation-type name, and fix all the other pages that reference it, fine. Having done that, then come back and report it's orphaned. Otherwise, no. You want it removed, fix all the other pages using it first. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What I meant was that it isn't used for anything except as a demonstration on other templates. I'm not proposing to delete other templates' documentation pages. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 17:40, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
in addition, FIPS was deprecated in 2008 and abandoned in 2014, so this template serves no purpose. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 04:44, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 00:36, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete, no longer needed. Frietjes (talk) 13:08, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; unused. —swpbT 12:56, 7 June 2017 (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).
