Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 February 9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 9

[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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Rename, with no prejudice against renominating if there is a desire to sync this with the one on commons. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-NZ-50-years (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Duplicate to {{PD-NZ}} Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:28, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Redirect to {{PD-US-not renewed}} (non-admin closure) →GƒoleyFour17:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-Pre1964 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{PD-US-not renewed}} Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:19, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete deprecated and unused. -Selket Talk 22:29, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:See main2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Hatnote. Produces: {{see main2|PAGE1|PAGE2}}{{see main2|PAGE1|PAGE2}} Which option is also covered by {{main}} in a more standard way. DePiep (talk) 16:35, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all of these. If somebody wants to rewrite them as redirects, and argument passes, to{{main}}, that would be acceptable. Doing so is a waste of processor time, but a minor one. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re: I agree that turning into Redirect (instead of Delete) is a solution too. I'll leave it up to the closing admin. Processor time is not an argument for us. -DePiep (talk) 19:07, 16 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete redundant and unused. --Selket Talk 22:31, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Seesubarticle2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Seesubarticle3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Hatnote. Produces {{Seesubarticle2|PAGE1|PAGE2}}{{Seesubarticle2|PAGE1|PAGE2}} Just a more specific situation (it suggests) of {{main}}, while we don't know the concept of "subarticles". DePiep (talk) 12:13, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: earlier TfD in 2005 (Keep). -DePiep (talk) 12:20, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. It is not necessary to use the grand general template when these work fine. If somebody wants to write as a redirect, that is merely a waste of processor time. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:09, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re: yes they work fine, but it adds another standard to the ~70 standards we already have. Really, 70 just for some hatnote links?-DePiep (talk) 19:11, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re2: and so what is a subarticle? (and after that: why should we care about processor time)? -DePiep (talk) 01:24, 16 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete (non-admin closure) As I'm not an admin, I'll will be tagging it as {{db-xfd}}GƒoleyFour17:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Vegetarian (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Silly. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:39, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:51, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Avatar: The Last Airbender season 1 episode list (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not an infobox. Unused. Purpose unclear. Probably unnecessary. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:38, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:52, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indian Ocean Island (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Old, unused infobox. Other, more specific infoboxes seem to be in use on Indian Ocean island articles. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:35, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:03, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indian Government (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A copyright template which is as clear as mud. It just quotes a section of Indian copyright law, not specifying anything further. And, guess what... you all know it by now... yes... it's unused. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:33, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indication de langue (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. This template is written in French ("Langue"), and is not needed on English Wikipedia. Purpose unclear. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:29, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was speedy delete as a test page. Jujutacular talk 08:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infoslika (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is a section heading. Not really useful. c y m r u . l a s s (talk me, stalk me) 05:57, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Wrong forum (non-admin closure) →GƒoleyFour17:31, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wrpg-videogame-stub (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is not a helpful separation of stub types, as articles are not separated in the manner. The link provided in the stub links to an article that was AfD'd. It is redirected to a section that is sourced from blogs and also-ran gaming sites. There is no corresponding non-stub article category. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 05:38, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  1. This should be discussed here rather than on this page.
  2. If we get rid of the western category, then we should be ditching the Japanese category, because the two are counterparts. See Role-playing video game#Cultural differences, and History of role-playing video games#Cultural differences.
Dawynn (talk) 10:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't realize it went here (CURSED TWINKLE!!!!). I didn't know there was a Japanese category, because of bugzilla:1211. I'll move it there. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 20:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion sent to Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2011/February/9. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 20:21, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Unnecessary and db-auth. --Selket Talk 22:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Dr Horrible (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I find that this navbox template is unnecessary and has no real potential for improvement or expanded usage. Most of the information it contains is readily available on the Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog article itself, thus making the navbox redundant. Its only transclusions are to the article itself, its soundtrack, and one of the production's creators (Joss Whedon). Perhaps the most undesireable aspect of the template is its "Characters" line, which, when on the main Dr. Horrible's article, just directs you to a section of the article you're already on. In addition to this template, I request the deletion of {{Dr Horrible}}, which is an unused exact duplicate of the main template, created by the same user. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 05:17, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to delete. You're entirely correct in your summation that it is of little use to anyone considering all of its information is readily available on the official page. I would have no issues if the template was deleted. --Morda898 (talk) 05:10, 20 February 2011 (GMT)

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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FIBA Oceania associations (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not everything needs a navbox. This has only one blue link and a bunch of redlinks. c y m r u . l a s s (talk me, stalk me) 05:15, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not likely to ever be completed. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 07:38, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:58, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:S.C.Ruffeyfan/Navbox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Personal template of an inactive user (User:S.C.Ruffeyfan). Only used in his/her userspace; inappropriate use of template namespace; can be substed where it is used in his/her userspace c y m r u . l a s s (talk me, stalk me) 05:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: At first I was going to recommend moving it to userspace, but then I had a look at S.C.Ruffeyfan's userpage: "I'm never using this page or my account at all, so I am now closing this account." Therefore, delete the template outright -- it doesn't appear that it will be missed. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 07:49, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:00, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Trang F.C. (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not everything needs a navbox. This navbox has only 2 links... c y m r u . l a s s (talk me, stalk me) 05:07, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:01, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:A Bug's Life (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Small template in which all articles are linked in the main article and are categorized under Category:A Bug's Life. Most of the articles in this template are also interlinked through other templates (such as Template:Pixar Animation Studios or the Disney Parks templates). WP:NENAN. --LoЯd ۞pεth 03:58, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:10, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.
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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep easier to write out. (non-admin closure) →GƒoleyFour17:34, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UserContribs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Very rarely used, unnecessary template where typing is almost as hard as it would be without the template. We have many other better user information templates in place. Most of the links come from {{User information templates}}, so don't come with the widely used argument, because the few remaining uses can easily be substituted. The Evil IP address (talk) 17:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:02, 9 February 2011 (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). No further edits should be made to this section.