Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 September 4

< September 3	September 5 >

September 4 edit

Template:David Choi 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) 04:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:David Choi (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Possibly WP:TOOSOON. Only 3 directly related articles plus primary topic, all easily interlinkable from one another. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:50, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I've redirected the two album articles to the artist's main page as they don't appear to be individually notable per WP:GNG or WP:NALBUMS. Navbox does not seem useful at this time - WP:NENAN. Gongshow ^Talk 01:47, 5 September 2012 (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:Navbox Born This Way Ball Tour 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) 04:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Navbox Born This Way Ball Tour (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates individual concerts from a tour--all of them PRODed. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:49, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to agree with the deletion. No reason for the template at all. It just links to individual pages for each concert which themselves should not be on the site. --Shadow (talk) 17:00, 6 September 2012 (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:User wikipedia/Confirmed 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 no consensus and wrong venue per WP:TFD#What not to propose for discussion here Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:23, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User wikipedia/Confirmed (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template created by user solely for his own use. I see no purpose to this userbox. Kinu ^t/_c 00:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To expand on my deletion rationale, per WP:USERBOX, the purpose of these is to directly (or even indirectly) help Wikipedians collaborate more effectively on articles. I can see the merit of userboxes that might be considered extremely esoteric (i.e., interest in a particular Pokémon = good for seeking out users to improve related articles). However, tagging the group of the handful of confirmed users is hardly necessary to advance editing of the encyclopedia; if a user is an active editor with more than a handful of edits, he is not a member of this group anyway, seeing as how s/he would be autoconfirmed. Indeed, even the user who created this userbox is no longer a member of said group; thus the template is completely unused. Ultimately, it's almost as much of a pointless userbox as the autoconfirmed userbox (which at least admits it is a joke, and is around for historical purposes I would surmise). --Kinu ^t/_c 20:36, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as above. – Richard BB 06:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's in line with all the existing templates for user rights, and it's in use, so I don't see that there's a compelling argument to delete. We allow editors considerable leeway with userboxes and this one pertains directly to editing, so in many ways it's actually more appropriate than most userboxes. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 08:42, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
keep, if you want to nominate a userbox, then nominate it at WP:MFD as per the WP:TFD instructions. Frietjes (talk) 17:45, 8 September 2012 (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.