Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 April 1#Template:Citation needed

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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 2022 April 9. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:26, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{tfd links|ICW_Women's_Championship}}

: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(s) or module(s) 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 no consensus. Feel free to enact the alternative renaming solution Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:25, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|OTRS topicon|module=|type=merge}}
• {{Tfd links|VRT topicon|module=|type=merge}}

Propose merging Template:OTRS topicon with Template:VRT topicon.

This one should be named {{tl|VRT topicon}} as it is the primary one. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:04, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

• Comment the new VRT topicon has poor contrast and doesn't pass WCAG contrast accessibility guidelines. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 22:14, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
• OPPOSE MERGE - the VRT topicon is easy to see - it’s used on other language sites - just delete the OTRS topicon as it is no longer valid. Atsme 💬 📧 20:01, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
• New suggestion I withdraw this merge nomination with the solution to move current Template:VRT topicon to Template:VRT topicon2 and Template:OTRS topicon to Template:VRT topicon per [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Josve05a&oldid=1080538345#Proposed_merge discussion. on my talk]. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:16, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 23:54, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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 keep. ✗plicit 23:44, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Signpost welcome}}

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=%22Wikipedia+and+larger+Wikimedia+community%22&title=Special:Search&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1&ns1=1&ns2=1&ns3=1&ns4=1&ns5=1&ns6=1&ns7=1&ns8=1&ns9=1&ns10=1&ns11=1&ns12=1&ns13=1&ns14=1&ns15=1&ns100=1&ns101=1&ns118=1&ns119=1&ns710=1&ns711=1&ns828=1&ns829=1&ns2300=1&ns2301=1&ns2302=1&ns2303=1 Does not appear to have been used since 2014] * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:33, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose It's still April Fools Day? That a template fell into dis-use doesn't negate its purpose. It should be used more, not deleted. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
• Keep I haven't interacted with this template in the past, but I plan on using it more often. It seems like it has a useful purpose. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 03:55, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
• Keep, per EpipPupper. Mjroots (talk) 12:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 04:21, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Alpine skiing at the 2019 European Youth Olympic Winter Festival}}

Unused and redundant with noting but mainly red links. And created by sockpuppet. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:05, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:33, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 04:22, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Cross-country skiing at the 2019 European Youth Olympic Winter Festival}}

Unused and filled with red links. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:26, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:33, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 11:53, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|The Lost Books of the Bible and the Forgotten Books of Eden}}

Does not comply with WP:NAVBOX guidelines, which suggest that "the subject of the template should be mentioned in every article", "The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent," and "If not for the navigation template, an editor would be inclined to link many of these articles in the See also sections of the articles." This collection of apocrypha (TLBotBatFBoE for short) is one of many, many published collections of apocrypha (if each collection had their own navbox, we'd have 10 similar navboxes at the bottom of a lot of articles). TLBotBatFBoE was merely reusing centuries old translations, was written millennia after these works were originally published, and is a rather eclectic set of works that would not easily be linked by a "See also" section (the letters of Ignatius are authentic letters by a 2nd century Christian; the Letter of Aristeas is a 2nd or 3rd century BCE Jewish work; the Gospel of Nicodemus is a medieval pseudepigraphic work; these aren't closely linked, and they're written over a millennium apart). The articles (correctly) don't generally mention their inclusion in this collection. It might be worth making an exception if TLBotBatFBoE was truly epicly popular, the authoritative 20th & 21st century source on these works, but a check of Amazon review count shows this collection with fewer reviews & ratings than other, more modern apocrypha collections. Anyway, apocrypha navboxes are fine, but the linked articles are already connected by {{tl|Jewish Apocrypha}}, {{tl|New Testament Apocrypha}}, and so on. This template is generally redundant to them with the exception of a few articles - and those articles (e.g. Odes of Solomon) should probably be included in a different navbox anyway with more directly related works. SnowFire (talk) 04:31, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:32, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 14:16, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|RTA infobox header}}

Unused rail template after the style was merged into the module. Gonnym (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:33, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 14:16, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|GZM RDT}}

unused Frietjes (talk) 19:23, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:01, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 14:17, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|GZM color}}
• {{Tfd links|GZM lines}}
• {{Tfd links|GZM stations}}
• {{Tfd links|GZM style}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/1}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/1}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/2}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/2}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/3}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/3}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/4}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/4}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/5}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/5}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/6}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/6}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/7}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/7}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/8}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/8}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/9}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/9}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/13}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/13}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/14}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/14}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/18}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/18}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/21}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/21}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/thz1}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/thz1}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/APM}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/APM}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM left/GF}}
• {{Tfd links|S-line/GZM right/GF}}

replaced by Module:Adjacent stations/Guangzhou Metro. Frietjes (talk) 19:23, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Delete all per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:02, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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 keep. ✗plicit 23:43, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Expand Bashkir}}

Unused language expansion header. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:31, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Keep as long as a Wikipedia edition in a language exists, then the Expand from Language template should exist, and would be expected to exist. ba.wikipedia.org exists. It should be marked as a low usage process. The general template {{tl|Expand language}} recommends NOT using it directly, and instead creating wrapper templates like {{tl|Expand Bashkir}} or {{tl|Expand German}} instead, so these should all exist. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 02:37, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
• Keep This is yet another template of the sort that needs to be around before the first time somebody needs it. The alternative is for it not to exist when it's needed, which is worse than having a template that isn't currently being used. Largoplazo (talk) 03:00, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
• Keep. It just needed appropriate documentation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:07, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
• Keep. Has a useful purpose, and having the template exist before usage is much more editor-friendly in this particular case. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 03:56, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_preload&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Template:House of Bourbon ( Louis IX to Henry IV)}}&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 April 1#Template:House of Bourbon ( Louis IX to Henry IV)}}&editintro=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_intro&preloadtitle={{urlencode:Template:House of Bourbon ( Louis IX to Henry IV)}}§ion=new&title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_undeletion&create=Request request the template's undeletion]. ✗plicit 23:42, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|House of Bourbon ( Louis IX to Henry IV)}}

Unused chart template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:41, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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 keep. ✗plicit 23:45, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Imagemap Germany district MEI}}
• {{Tfd links|Imagemap Germany district SHK}}

Unused Germany district image maps. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:45, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

:Keep. These templates were meant for use in the infoboxes for the muncipalities in these districts. For some reason the automatic transclusion of these templates from the infoboxes was broken, probably because the infobox uses the vehicle registration code (which was modified in the articles). Since I think these clickable maps are valuable, I have added them to the respective district articles (Meissen (district) and Saale-Holzland-Kreis). Markussep ^Talk 10:52, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

::@Markussep if there is a bug in the functionally of the infobox you should post on it on the talk page so it can be fixed. Gonnym (talk) 11:08, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

:::The problem is that since a few years several licence plate codes are possible in each district, so for instance Priestewitz now lists MEI, GRH, RG, RIE. The infobox doesn't find a template {{tl|Imagemap Germany district MEI, GRH, RG, RIE}}, so no clickable map is given. Maybe we can think of something intelligent like looking for commas and ignoring everything after a comma. Markussep ^Talk 11:17, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

:Keep as now used. Gonnym (talk) 11:07, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_preload&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Template:Indian Air Force enlisted ranks}}&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 April 1#Template:Indian Air Force enlisted ranks}}&editintro=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_intro&preloadtitle={{urlencode:Template:Indian Air Force enlisted ranks}}§ion=new&title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_undeletion&create=Request request the template's undeletion]. ✗plicit 23:42, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Indian Air Force enlisted ranks}}

Unused military rank template. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:49, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_preload&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Template:Ipberemoved}}&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2022 April 1#Template:Ipberemoved}}&editintro=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_intro&preloadtitle={{urlencode:Template:Ipberemoved}}§ion=new&title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_undeletion&create=Request request the template's undeletion]. ✗plicit 23:42, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Ipberemoved}}

Unused message template. Not substituted anywhere if that was the intent. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:06, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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. ✗plicit 23:42, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|OG1color}}
• {{Tfd links|OG2color}}
• {{Tfd links|OG3color}}

Unused medal icon templates. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:12, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

:Delete. Regardless of being unused or not, we shouldn't be using these gold medal specific-type icons like those in :Category:Medal icon templates (and which a few recent discussions have resulted in deletions). There are a few issues with these: the icon is just too small to be of use to a large portion of our readers; The color fails MOS:CONTRAST. Finally, these are pretty much redundant. The gold medal is not showing out of context and is showing in relation to a tournament so if it is an Olympic tournament it is obviously an Olympic medal. Creating medals for each tournament will be a huge maintenance burden instead of just dealing with 1 single gold medal template. Gonnym (talk) 08:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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 2022 April 8. ✗plicit 23:45, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{tfd links|A._Smith_&_Co.}}

: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(s) or module(s) 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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:11, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|List of populated places in Colorado navbox}}

Can be replaced by the standard {{tl|Compact ToC}} (see List of Xbox One games (A–L) as an example). Izno (talk) 23:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

:Keep: This template works better than {{tl|Compact ToC}} on these pages, so I think we should keep it. Thanks,  Buaidh  talk e-mail 01:34, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

:delete after replacing with {{tl|Compact TOC}} or {{tl|A-Z multipage list}}. also, it's very confusing that L-Z is split from the main page, but A-K is not. they should either both be split, or neither. Frietjes (talk) 15:27, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 17:33, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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 April Fools' always. Until it's over (like now) (non-admin closure) Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis 02:23, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|AprilFoolsNotice}}

April Fools today, April Fools tomorrow, April Fools forever B2TF (talk) 05:54, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: Oppose. I seem to get tired of it after 18:00 UTC in my experience. And it's not just me. It's only slightly past halfway, and likely 75% of what's going to happen has already happened. HotdogPi 12:51, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: Oppose - I personally don't like living in Groundhog Day, but I also personally don't like living in Groundhog Day. Oh right, I don't really want to live in Groundhog Day. Did I mention th –ToxiBoi! _(public) 17:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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 Citation added. April fools' is over. (non-admin closure) Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis 02:24, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Citation needed}}

Per WP:Citation needed.{{4-1}}{{cn}} Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis 04:35, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Delete as unnecessary and distracting. {{Citation needed|date=April 2022}} -KAP03 (^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 06:06, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. Unsourced since 2005. - Preceding signed comment added by Evil Sith Lord (talk • contribs) 07:33, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
• Delete It's only deleterious. Why draw attention to the fact that content is temporarily without sources? Just make up your own sources per WP:SOFIXIT. Content is meant to look good on the page; the act of tagging any article with this template is political dissent against the People and cannot be tolerated. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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(s) or module(s) 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 Hahaha. April fools' is over. (non-admin closure) Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis 02:24, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

• {{Tfd links|Humor}}

This template claims that the material tagged with it is not meant to be taken seriously. However, material tagged with this template is actually the only material on the entire site that is meant to be taken seriously. This needs to be fixed! - Preceding signed comment added by Evil Sith Lord (talk • contribs) 07:30, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

• Mark historical It used to be that the court jester could ridicule the king and get away with it by calling it comedy. Ever since the revolt of the proletariat, the king has been replaced by the oligarchy and the oligarchs seem to have less tolerance for comedy. Also pouring one out for {{noping|Barbara (WVS)}}, a former purveyor of humor for The Signpost as things got so serious. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:57, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

: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).