Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 August 27

< August 26	August 28 >

August 27 edit

Template:Majorca infobox 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:Ratify. Weak delete, doesn't seem necessary, but I'm not sure what its intended use was. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Supefluous and unused. Mallorca uses Template:Spanish city instead. --Bob 23:59, 30 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:Mhux bil-Malti 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:Quadratic. Delete, it doesn't make any sense at all. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not used (for a good reason). Punkmorten 07:28, 28 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:Naismith Award Winners Women 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:Fred Bradstadt. Delete, Template:succession box can be used instead. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:Nuclear spacecraft propulsion 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:Jrockley. Delete, identical to Template:Nuclear propulsion. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC) Redirect - GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 20:14, 2 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:Save page 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 page.

The result of the debate was no consensus. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Was nominated by User:Who with reason "Feel that {{test}} (1-3) cover this topic, although this one has extra text, it is just redundant. Possibly merge or redirect." in August 2005, but was accidentally removed. Delete, I think it's obvious that you don't type "save page" to save the page. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I conclude from the existence of the page that some newbie did exactly that, and perhaps several. It should be added to Template:TestTemplates . Septentrionalis 16:36, 30 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:TV-MA 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:Pacific Coast Highway. Delete, I believe I've seen precedents against templates with just a piped link; appears to be used only in articles with Template:Infobox Television, which no longer uses the rating parameter. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --Palffy 14:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Redundant. Daniel's page ☎ 01:42, 2 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:TV-tome 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:213.23.143.82. Delete, unuseful link to external website. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Whether or not it would be useful, the web site no longer exists. All pages redirect to tv.com.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arthur Rubin (talk • contribs) 23:27, August 28, 2006 (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). No further edits should be made to this page.

Template:United Kingdom infobox 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion.

Completing incomplete nomination by User:Brendenhull. Delete, unneeded (apparently) single-use infobox that isn't used; United Kingdom uses Template:Infobox country. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete redundant. --Bob 16:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete agreed with above. --Durin 16:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Redundant. Daniel's page ☎ 01:43, 2 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:Wade Trophy 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:Fred Bradstadt. Delete, Template:succession box can be used instead. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per TimBentley. --Palffy 14:50, 30 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:Wikiportal:Philately/Opentask 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:21, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:AdrianMastronardi. Delete, unused, Wikipedia:WikiProject_Philately seems to just use a to-do list. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:Wooden Award Winners Women 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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:Fred Bradstadt. Delete, Template:succession box can be used instead. TimBentley (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:TSN 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 page.

The result of the debate was speedied by User:ais523 per G7. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:24, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created it and later found an existing template that does the same thing ({{ITIS}}). I've updated all uses of the TSN template to the ITIS template, so it can be safely deleted. Thanks! Graham^talk/mail/e 20:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speeedy delete as G7. --Edgelord 22:23, 27 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:CURRENTHOUR 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 page.

The result of the debate was to keep, apparently. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:26, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a courtesy listing on behalf of User:Sebmol; I removed the speedy template a few minutes ago. His reasoning:

no longer needed now that {{CURRENTHOUR}} is a variable (in fact, {{CURRENTHOUR}} will not transclude this template) sebmol 18:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've tested the claim; {{CURRENTHOUR}} in fact simply displays the environment variable ({{cURRENTHOUR}} seems to be the only way to transclude). ~ PseudoSudo 20:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I confirm that I proposed that this template be deleted (speedy in fact) because there's absolutely no point to keep it. I didn't figure any further discussion was necessary. sebmol 09:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Obsolete. Keep - This apparently has not been replaced? At least none is listed at Help:Magic Words. --CBD 01:16, 31 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:Wikipedia Sucks 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 page.

The result of the debate was speedy delete, vandalism. Tito xd^(?!?) 22:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this, because wikipedia doesn't suck, of course. (and the template is pointless, unused, etc) Xyzzyplugh 18:32, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as vandalism, please. ~ PseudoSudo 20:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete tagged. Punkmorten 20:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Deletre per PseudoSudo. --Edgelord 22:26, 27 August 2006 (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 page.

Template:Inactive 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 page.

The result of the debate was Speedy Keep, because the nomination is simply not correct. Of course it's useful - it's transcluded onto over 150 pages! kingboyk 21:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not really useful, neither in terms of viewing or editing. GW_Simulations_{User Page | Talk} 15:29, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, useful, helps users find WikiProjects that are ... you guessed it, inactive, and need a breath of life. Punkmorten 20:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: although it might scare away new users, it's pretty useful for guys like me at WikiProject Council.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Talk) 21:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Perhaps a better name like Template:Inactive WikiProject would be better? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kevin Breitenstein (talk • contribs) .

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 page.

Template:Globalize/Muslim 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 page.

The result of the debate was to keep. RyanG e rbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 19:30, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not used, and future use doesn't seem very likely. Redundant with {{Globalize}} in any case. On the talk page of the creator, he indicated that it was not created for practical purposes. Punkmorten 15:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep. A very useful template, in fact. New articles on topics of interest related to Islam are often written in a religious style inappropriate to Wikipedia (use of PBUH, veracity "proved" by strengths of hadiths, use of religious and Arabic terms unknown to the layperson, etc.) It's entirely consistent with the other centric templates. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 08:23, 2 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:Boobs 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 page.

The result of the debate was speedy delete T1 by User:Lbmixpro. --ais523 11:41, 30 August 2006 (U T C)

Empty, unused and unencyclopaedic. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, empty and useless. Punkmorten 20:47, 27 August 2006 (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 page.