Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 July 5

< July 4	July 6 >

July 5 edit

Template:Please help us improve the information on this page (this goes out to Annapolis historians, citizens and Annapolis High students / teachers) 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 per WP:CSD#G2 Enigma^msg 04:19, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Please help us improve the information on this page (this goes out to Annapolis historians, citizens and Annapolis High students / teachers) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template, doesn't appear to be useful. snigbrook (talk) 21:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - we don't want to encourage templates like this, as something similar could arguably be placed on every page in Wikipedia. Robofish (talk) 21:45, 5 July 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:Torchwood (series 3) 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. JPG-GR (talk) 00:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Torchwood (series 3) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unnecessary navigation template: navigation template for a television 'season' which only contains a single episode/miniseries. No possibility of expansion, as there will not be any further episodes in this season. Robofish (talk) 21:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Neither Torchwood nor List_of_Torchwood_episodes has this template (It is only used on the page for that single episode). The list of episodes already lists everything. I would be fine with it being recreated once the 4th season is aired. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 19:50, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Cs-wolves (talk) 20:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agree, per nom, no point in having a template with just one page about it. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 23:32, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no need for this at all. 86.131.237.120 (talk) 10:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - completely stupid. ╟─Treasury Tag►senator─╢ 08:23, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Most definitely delete - What idiot thought it was necessary to make this template? It only consists of five episodes telling the same story with nearly identical titles, with no more episodes. nm3yt 10:52 11 July 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nm3yt (talk • contribs) 09:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Pointless unless there was more episodes which there isn't. Whoniverse93 talk? 10:31, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - one story. If you're seeing the template, you're already on the only episode it links to. It just isn't needed. Digifiend (talk) 12:09, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unnecessary template as the third series of Torchwood was only one story, and as such only one link. Children of Earth was the single story arc. YeshuaDavid • Talk • 14:19, 11 July 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:Michelle Paver 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. JPG-GR (talk) 00:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Michelle Paver (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All but 2 items of the content were converted to redirects because of lack of sourced content. No need for a nav box consisting solely of the author and one book. -- The Red Pen of Doom 21:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not needed at this time. Robofish (talk) 21:44, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 19:50, 6 July 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:Clarence Gagnon 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. JPG-GR (talk) 00:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Clarence Gagnon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A navbox comprised only of red links, therefore redundant. Ham 18:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - entirely redlinked templates are useless. In this case it could be converted into a list and added to the article, but I'm reluctant to do so as it says 'and many more', so is clearly incomplete. Robofish (talk) 21:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. All red links. Should be in the article as a completed list with a reference. -- ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 19:50, 6 July 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.