Template talk:l/de

Deleted per WT:RFDO:

Template:l/de
Nothin special with it. --Dixtosa (talk) 19:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Renard Migrant (talk) 19:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep and deprecate; it is now used in too many pages. We need to make the page histories legible. Whoever created this and deployed so widely should have thought twice. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:53, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment; true, the template is being used in 3,800+ pages at this moment. However, a substantial number of those is just verbs with conjugation tables that use (used in 3,500+ pages). In the conjugation table, there is a cell named "auxiliary" that links to exactly two words:  and/or, using . I am going to change it to , which will reflect in the verbs pages and will not make their page histories unreadable for this reason, since the historical versions will just keep using the  template. If there are performance issues as suggested below, feel free to revert. If there are not any performance issues, I'd vote delete. --Daniel 08:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Related to my message above, is also using  in 230+ pages. I am going to edit the template now to remove . --Daniel 16:49, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Inflection tables should really use instead of  so that forms that are identical to the lemma show up in bold without a link rather than in blue with a link to the same page you're already on. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I was wrong, there is a specialty - performance. calls (1) a module and does some lookup (2) in order to map a language code to a language name, none of which is done byl/xx. Not sure if the overhead is that problematic though. --Dixtosa (talk) 21:20, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Performance was the entire reason for the existence of all of the l/ templates: at the time, the template was causing serious perfomance problems in larger pages. Now that it's been switched over to Lua, that's not as much of an issue, but there are still a few huge index pages where I've swapped out l for l/ templates to fix module errors from overrunning the allowed module-execution time. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I imagine it could be removed from the main namespace and used only in appendices. Renard Migrant (talk) 15:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Note that these specific templates do not have all the capabilities of . For example, they lack  parameter.
 * Also, for only few pages that are -intensive we can use --Dixtosa (talk) 00:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Somewhat hilariously, a lot of these templates call directly (see  for a specific example). So they now do the very thing they were created to avoid. Even worse, because they call l but don't allow all its parameters, so they're literally worse than useless. Renard Migrant (talk) 12:12, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Now unused delete. —Enosh (talk) 15:46, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Removing it from the verb-conjugation tables seems to have indeed eliminated most uses; there are now only two. - -sche (discuss) 02:59, 25 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Safe to Delete along with Template:link/de. All uses have been expurgated. --Celui qui crée ébauches de football anglais (talk) 22:31, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

RFD discussion: June 2015–January 2022

 * See Template talk:l/bg.