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 relisted on 2020 January 11. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Oregon_Companies_talk (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:20, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Liga Chilena de Fútbol: Segunda División (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

provides no useful navigation between articles since the clubs are already listed in the parent article Frietjes (talk) 18:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 12:44, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as inferior & outdated duplicate of {{Segunda División Profesional de Chile}}. GiantSnowman 12:46, 4 January 2020 (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. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:30, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:FEMM songs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not a single one of the songs listed has an article, thus rendering this template useless. Vaporgaze (talk) 17:52, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There are four links in the template: three are to the band, of which two can be removed, and one album. There are not enough notable releases to justify this having its own template. Aspects (talk) 00:38, 7 January 2020 (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 relisted on 2020 January 11. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:23, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:No. (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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 relisted on 2020 January 11. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:41, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:China-based_financial_stocks_in_Hong_Kong (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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 relisted on 2020 January 11. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Universal_Studios_Beijing (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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 Soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:40, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Eastern Economic Corridor Districts (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is inappropriate scope for a navbox. The Eastern Economic Corridor is a special economic development zone which has no direct relation to the individual districts which happen to be included within its area. None of the articles appear to link to or from each other in the context of the EEC. There is no topic article, and one should not be expected to exist. Each of the districts is already served by a province navbox. Paul_012 (talk) 06:05, 26 December 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 result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:35, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Ancient Egypt dynasties sidebar (small) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The template is redundant to both {{Ancient Egypt dynasties sidebar}} and {{History of Egypt}} for different articles and use-cases. The template is used on 2 articles and 1 non-article, in all cases, it can be replaced with one of the above templates and for the non-article one of the above templates is already in use. The fact that it is a non-standard width makes it feel out of place when near other sidebars and infoboxes aswell. – BrandonXLF (talk) 03:49, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - navboxes are only useful when they appear on the complete set of articles they link to WP:NAVBOX, which not surprisingly is stated in WP:BIDIRECTIONAL. If a side navigation template is considered too big, then convert it to a bottom navigation. --Gonnym (talk) 11:24, 3 January 2020 (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 relisted on 2020 January 11. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:23, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Infobox_animanga_character (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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).