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).
Yes there is. It is well-established practice that Route Diagram Templates — even single-use ones — should be kept separate because of the potential for accidental damage. (A misspelled word will generally not cause a problem with an article; a single incorrect character can completely break an RDT.) Useddenim (talk) 00:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above. Keeping the very complicated template code out of the main article also improves accessibility for those editors who want to improve the prose. Thryduulf (talk) 13:07, 2 March 2019 (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).
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).
Keep - I've re-connected the doc page and updated it with the actual usage. No reason to put categories in the template when the /doc was created for that. --Gonnym (talk) 10:20, 28 February 2019 (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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
Delete - absolutely no reason to redirect this, as this isn't a plausible search (and it has no incoming links). This also falls under G8. --Gonnym (talk) 21:31, 27 February 2019 (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).
Delete - absolutely no reason to redirect this, as this isn't a plausible search (and it has no incoming links). This also falls under G8.
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).
All templates in Category:Unnecessary taxonomy templates[edit]
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).
This category is a temporary holding area for taxonomy templates whose deletion will be uncontroversial, because the template is both unused and unnecessary, e.g. because it is incorrectly set up, or relates to a taxon no longer used. Periodically, all templates in this category will be nominated for deletion. For more details, see this talk page thread at Wikipedia talk:Automated taxobox system. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:12, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete These are templates used by the Wikipedia:Automated taxobox system; they are never placed directly on articles. I'm responsible for placing some of these templates in the holding category. As far as I'm aware, these templates have all been blanked (all the ones I've edited certainly are); being blank, if they are ever used they will generate an error that shows up in Category:Taxobox cleanup. None of these should ever be used. The ones I've edited generally have a misspelling of the taxon name, unnecessary disambiguation, lack necessary disambiguation, or use some other non-standard format in the template name. Many of the ones I haven't edited are for virus species. Templates for species aren't needed in the Automated taxobox system, although it was only recently that {{Virusbox}} was upgraded to eliminate the need for virus species templates. Plantdrew (talk) 21:03, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. They are unused and most (all?) can't be used as they have been blanked or commented out. They are both unnecessary and unusable which puts them firmly in Norwegian parrot territory. Jts1882 | talk07:52, 2 March 2019 (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).
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).
All 165 of these are unused. All appear to have been created/maintained by bots. Any user wishing to use the {{Adminstats}} template can do so with a direct implementation. No reason for these templates to stick around, particularly when they are unused. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:23, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete@Zackmann08: This is a misunderstanding of how {{adminstats}} works, all it does is call its subtemplates, so one can't use the {{adminstats}} template ... with a direct implementation. However, if any of the admins in question do decide to add {{Adminstats}} do their userpage, the bot can easily recreate the page, so there is no reason to keep the unused templates around. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 20:46, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think the bigger issue is that this is pointless without finding and removing any non-sysop usage of the template; they'll just be recreated until we do. I'll gladly delete any of these arising from users who have never been sysops or account creators per previous consensus/discussions. ~ Amory(u • t • c)20:59, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Zackmann08: Can I suggest withdrawing this? There is history here, see a lengthy discussion at User_talk:Cyberpower678/Archive_58#Cyberbot_1_creating_adminstats_for_non-admin_users. These are indeed updated by a bot, operated by Cyberpower678, but that is how this template works: a bot updates all of them. Sometimes non-sysops will have these created by misusing the template, hence the "disallowed" message, and those should be deleted per previous discussions once the use of the template has been removed. There has been no consensus that adminstats for former sysops (or those no longer actively transcluding it) should be deleted, and just from a quick scan I can see that you have a number of former and current sysops in this list, including some who have used this very recently. I think this issue is on CBP's radar, which is where the fix should come from. Deleting any with the template transcluded will just have them recreated. I think it's better to deal with at the source, then handle what's left when we get there. ~ Amory(u • t • c)20:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As long as someone transcludes {{adminstats}}, the personalized template will be created and updated when relevant. If someone is not a sysop, they get an error, which never needs to be updated (the bot should probably just not create the page). If someone was a sysop, their data is overwritten with the error message (the bot should probably not do anything, leaving the history of their actions). If someone is a sysop but doesn't take any actions, it won't be updated. In all those cases, if the template is deleted, the bot will recreate it; that is what I meant to get at. Users who remove the transclusion from a user subpage will cause the template to stop to be updated. A good example is Widr, who replaced their userpage in October, hence the template stopped updating. The bot will not recreate those, and per pppery, if they are deleted and subsequently transcluded, they'll be recreated. ~ Amory(u • t • c)21:32, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, as far as I can tell the following are being actively as we speak:
keep these users were previously admins. And have a pipe of page history. I think if they do not want these, feel free to add g7 instead. And this TfD is unhelpful for bot update. Last year, I just try to cleanup a pipe of adminstats who has never been either an account creator or admins. I think you should try to contact these users first instead of TfD. Also, bot will ignore TfD outcome if you delete blindly. Hhkohh (talk) 00:20, 28 February 2019 (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).
I don't have enough information to support or oppose. I just wanted to make sure that commenters understood what was being proposed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Cautious delete. These are unused and there are so many. Being unused, these are more or less acting as non updated encyclopedic pages. Keeping these if they are unused violates WP:NOT#industry almanac and also is misleading to readers, as they aren't used nor up to date. I support complete deletion per Andrew Su and nom, however would advocate for some means to check that the thousands of subtemplates are indeed not used before they are batch delete.--Tom (LT) (talk) 09:07, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Tom (LT): I 100% agree with what you said about checking. For transparency, this is the query I am using: https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/33873. This is similar to other queries we have been using to track unused templates so the query is well tested. IF this TFD passes as delete then I would pass that query on to the admin who carries out the delete. Please {{ping}} me if you have any questions about it. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:33, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - seeing as how the creator of these templates has supported the deletion as these are replaced by {{Infobox_gene}} and that these are unused, these should be deleted. Support Tom's comment. --Gonnym (talk) 10:33, 28 February 2019 (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).
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 documentation says this infobox is deprecated. If it should be deleted, then it should be deleted and not be kept in this limbo state. Gonnym (talk) 09:57, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As noted in the infobox documentation. "It is primarily intended to allow the infobox to display correctly in when view the history of older articles, and not for general use in articles." For those of us who occasionally have to troll through aircraft article histories for whatever reason, having a working infobox is useful. The current delete notice has broken the infobox, resulting in this mess in the history, which would be permanent if the infobox is deleted. - BilCat (talk) 10:25, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Seems strange that out of the thousands of templates on Wikipedia, only this template needs this workaround. Why is it even helpful to see how the infobox looked at least 2.5 years ago (when the deprecation notice was added)? --Gonnym (talk) 10:35, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's been deprecated longer than that, probably since 2008. The old infobox is a relic, and was updated to use modules at about that time. Since we can't update the history, we kept tne infobox around. I realize it might not seem useful to you, but as long as one person finds it helpful to have a working infobox in the history, isn't that enough? - BilCat (talk) 10:51, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As Infobox aircraft begin "acts to provide common formatting for other aircraft-related infoboxes." per the documentation. When the remaining transclusions are replaced with Infobox aircraft begin, would it not be possible for Infobox aircraft begin to be movedtoInfobox aircraft and maybe use a bot to renameInfobox aircraft begintoInfobox aircraft? Just think its a bit weird having "begin" in the title. Steven (Editor) (talk) 02:57, 14 February 2019 (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).
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).
