Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 August 28

< August 27	August 29 >

August 28 edit

Template:Infobox Constellation-svg 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 delete per CSD#T3. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Constellation-svg (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant with {{Infobox Constellation}}. The only difference is the use of a svg image instead of png. Perhaps a new parameter in the original one? Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 23:24, 28 August 2009 (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.

Template:Prose timeline (3rd nomination) 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 redirect to {{prose}}. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:55, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Prose timeline (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Points to an essay, the name of which does not even agree with the template's name. The talk pages of both the template and the essay are strongly evidentiary of general WP community rejection of the essay - virtually every comment on both talk pages is negative. Template masquerades as a policy/guideline-based cleanup tag, but is not. It is simply one editor's neologistic opinion about "proseline". — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 22:49, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, along with the associated category. Essay clearly does not have enough community support for us to be using this tag. Also redundant to {{prose}}. PC78 (talk) 19:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I think there are two issues here. First, should a cleanup template point readers to an essay that is not a guideline or policy? I think that's dubious, although this isn't the only cleanup template that does this (for example, {{close paraphrase}}, {{criticism-section}}, {{fancruft}} and {{in popular culture}} all point to essays). Using the same template style that is also used for policy and guideline based messages gives them an unwarranted appearance of authority. Second, does this particular template warn about a truly distinct issue, or is it redundant to other templates, such as {{prose}} or {{cleanup}}? I looked at some cases where this was used, and I don't think this particular template provided much benefit. The sections in question tended to be either obvious lists (perhaps not bulleted, but still lists) or messy prose that had other issues beyond being a timeline. The first of these two issues could be fixed by removing the essay link from the template (or getting the essay promoted to a guideline), but the second one clinches it for me. --RL0919 (talk) 19:55, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Update: The template in question is clearly redundant with Template:Prose, which actually links to real guideline material, on embedded lists. A merger is probably in order, as I think the template at issue here has a parameter that {{prose}} does not. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like nothing is using the part parameter, so a straight redirect would work fine. — RockMFR 22:04, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge or redirect, whatever you guys think. --John (talk) 01:28, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect/Merge with {{Prose}}, per above. Essay is not policy, and the concept is already covered by the legit {{Prose}} template. -M.Nelson (talk) 03:35, 3 September 2009 (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.

Template:Infobox Bridge in Malaysia 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 delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:50, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Bridge in Malaysia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant with {{Infobox bridge}} Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 21:17, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Standardisation is good! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as redundant. Someone will have to update the 60+ pages that currently link to that template to point to the generic one instead. It appears all parameters match, with the exception of Malay name needs to be changed to native_name. Perhaps a job for a strong AWB and regex user. 7 03:44, 3 September 2009 (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.

Template:Infobox Animorphs book 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 delete Skier Dude (talk) 04:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Animorphs book (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant with {{Infobox Book}} Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 20:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Standardisation is good! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:34, 31 August 2009 (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.

Template:Infobox Arabperson 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 delete Skier Dude (talk) 04:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redundant with {{Infobox person}} Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 19:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unused, unnecessary fork of {{Infobox person}}. --RL0919 (talk) 19:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Jehorn (talk) 20:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Standardisation is good! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:34, 31 August 2009 (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.

Template:Infobox 125cc rider 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 delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:06, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox 125cc rider (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Infobox 250cc rider (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Infobox Supersport rider (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Infobox Superbike rider (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All of them redundant with {{Infobox motorcycle rider}}. The only problem I see is the lack of some parameters (e. "Current team"). Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 15:58, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no input for BSB (British Superbike Championship) within the above table, Neither for BSS (British Supersport) when that is sorted it would make a better alround table Xrateddan (talk) 18:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom, after adding required parameters to {{Infobox motorcycle rider}}. Standardisation is good! Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:34, 31 August 2009 (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.

Template:Infobox-plant 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 delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox-plant (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Sits very poorly with the taxobox. No indication how the parameters should be used. Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 15:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Blatant violation of WP:NOT, as the purpose of this infobox is to present how-to information (how to grow the plant in question). — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 08:20, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:34, 31 August 2009 (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.

Template:Infobox Mixtape 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 speedy delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused template for mixedtapes. All info hardcoded (accepts no parameters) so if you switch from a working {{infobox album}} to {{Infobox Mixtape}} you get static data for Stat Quo. Would have recommended it be made dynamic, but per WP:MUSIC mixtapes are not generally notable - plus {{infobox album}} can already accept parameter "Type = Mixtape". Suggest deletion. 7 04:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*Note: template creator has been notified, but is indef blocked for disruptive editing. 7 04:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete T3, as a hardcoded instance of {{Infobox album}}. --RL0919 (talk) 15:45, 28 August 2009 (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.

Template:Scream Queens 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 delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Scream Queens (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A scream queen is "an actress who has become associated with horror films, either through an appearance in a notable entry in the genre as a frequent victim or through constant appearances as the female protagonist".

Based on this definition of the concept, this navigation template is destined to always be incomplete (or massively large) and based on subjective assessments of whether an actress is sufficiently "associated with horror films" to merit the label "scream queen". Furthermore, the distinction between "classic", "prominent", and "other" (presumably non-classic and non-prominent) scream queens smacks of original research. (Template creator notified using {{tfdnotice}}.) –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 03:57, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per justification above, plus the fact that it has 30+ links within the template, yet only 9 of those articles use the template indicate that the flaws have already proved it to be incomplete. Additionally, at least one article reviewed Kate Beckinsale doesn't reference her as a scream queen anywhere in the article. 7 04:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The article on Scream queens is a horror, so I'd suggest the editor who created this template should take a stab at improving that instead. --RL0919 (talk) 15:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No reason why this should exist as there is no significant association between any of the individual biography articles. If anything it would be better as a category, but I bet that would end up at CfD for much the same reasons presented here. PC78 (talk) 16:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Too many scream queens to be named in a navbox template. Unclear use of "prominent" and "classic" --Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 16:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I only linked it to said pages. But you guys are right. I see no real reason for it's existence. Nice reference, however it's not really something worthy of Wikipedia.FaithLehaneTheVampireSlayer 00:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:34, 31 August 2009 (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.