Wikifunctions:Requests for deletions
Functions or implementations or tests which do not work properly, do not meet notability criteria or are duplicates of another object can be deleted. Please nominate items for deletions under the "Requests for deletion" section below.
If it is obvious vandalism, just report it in Wikifunctions:Report vandalism, or ping an administrator. Contact can also be made with an administrator on Telegram or IRC #wikipedia-abstract.
If it is a predefined object (it's ZID is less than 10000), please see Wikifunctions:Report a technical problem.
 | SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day. |
| edit |
 |
|---|
| Archives |
Duplicate of Z21554. This was created before Z21554, but currently there is most support and integration of the newer func. Requesting deletion of Z19118, its 1 impl., and 1 test (3 are linked in the header.)
In case anyone wishes to move the 5 tests and 1 extra js impl. to the older function for deleting the newer func (Z21554), I have no objection to that. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
- Ping creators of both the functions: @Unformedlogic and @MolecularPilot ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:06, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
I created it for test purposes, but since typed maps don't work it's useless. Dv103 (talk) 14:53, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
- On the other hand, we’re awaiting a decision on phab:T391159. We might be able to code accessor function implementations, and having a test object available might be simpler than relying on Z804 (or coding a setter, which I’m not sure is feasible or desirable). GrounderUK (talk) 16:00, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
- It makes sense. Do you know a way to populate it? Dv103 (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
- I guess it would have to be something like User:Feeglgeef/wikilambda editsource.js. I’ve never tried it myself… GrounderUK (talk) 17:28, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
- It makes sense. Do you know a way to populate it? Dv103 (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2025 (UTC)