Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 July 2

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< July 1 July 3 >

July 2 edit

Template:New York City Audio Productions 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 04:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't meet most of WP:NAVBOX's five points—not connected to each other in any way apart from apparently being four post-production companies in NYC. czar 22:09, 2 July 2016 (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).

Template:Multicol 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).

The result of the discussion was merge the various "multi" templates below into the "Col-begin" system. While discussion didn't focus on which direction to merge, I've examined the templates, and it's technically easier to merge in this direction to the point where AnomieBOT will be able to mass-substitute them after converting to a wrapper of sorts. ~ Rob13Talk 04:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Multicol with Template:Col-begin.
They obviously do the same thing and their auxiliary templates too. Dvorapa (talk) 14:23, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

support, assuming we also merge all the sibling templates (e.g., col-break, col-end, ...) Frietjes (talk) 22:33, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: @Frietjes: Could you nominate the other templates you want included in this nomination clearly with notices on their template pages?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ RobTalk 18:42, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge sounds ok; though I haven't looked these over as much as I would have liked, I expect this can be accomplished. —PC-XT+ 17:58, 7 July 2016 (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).

Template:Turkish musicians 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. The single opposing editor failed to argue against the fact that this either has an arbitrary selection criteria or would become far too large to be a useful navbox. There is also a good deal of precedent that categories are preferable in these sorts of situations. ~ Rob13Talk 00:07, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

this is why we have list articles (List of Turkish musicians) and categories (Category:Turkish musicians). Frietjes (talk) 14:38, 2 July 2016 (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).

Brazil national team youth squad templates 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).

The result of the discussion was delete all. ~ Rob13Talk 03:34, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is longstanding consensus at both TFD and WT:FOOTBALL that youth squad templates are not notable - only senior ones, and only for major tournaments. These have all been created by one over-zealous user and should all be deleted. GiantSnowman 13:11, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 13:11, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per prior consensus. Frietjes (talk) 14:39, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete speedy per numerous prior consensus. JackHoang (talk) 00:36, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Kante4 (talk) 10:39, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per standing consensus. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 08:58, 7 July 2016 (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).

Template:Miss Namibia 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 03:51, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox with just one link. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, we can use standard linking for connecting two articles. Frietjes (talk) 14:40, 2 July 2016 (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).

Template:From Ashes to New 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 03:50, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The articles which are linked to in this template all link to an from each other thus this navbox doesn't further aid in navigation. WP:NENAN. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 06:53, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, we can use standard linking for connecting three articles. Frietjes (talk) 14:39, 2 July 2016 (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).

Template:Red Sun Rising 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 03:45, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Musical group with an article for only one album. Links only between two articles don't need a navigation box. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 06:44, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, we can use standard linking for connecting two articles. Frietjes (talk) 14:40, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, no need for a navigation box with only two articles. Acidskater (talk) 13:35, 9 July 2016 (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).

Template:Miss Bolivia 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob13Talk 03:47, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox with just one link. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:20, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, we can use standard linking for connecting two articles. Frietjes (talk) 14:40, 2 July 2016 (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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_July_2&oldid=1138532898"