Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2009 November 18

November 18

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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Voice Actors (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Don't see what useful purpose this template serves other than cruft. KuyaBriBriTalk 23:24, 18 November 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.
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 deleted as a test page. Template was made by a very new user who apparently did not quite get how templates work. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:17, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:External Links (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Don't see what use this template serves. It looks like a bit of experimentation rather than something useful to Wikipedia. Biker Biker (talk) 22:52, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete unless the creator appears to explain expansion plans for it. All it does now is output two words of bold text, which could be typed more easily than using a template. --RL0919 (talk) 23:33, 18 November 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.
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 keep (withdrawn by nominator) David Göthberg (talk) 23:58, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Werdnabot (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This bot no longer is in use, according to its talkpage (User talk:Werdnabot). Logan Talk Contributions 21:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. It might be better to deprecate this first, both to see if anyone wants to "adopt" the bot and fix it, and to allow some time for alternative archiving to be set up for the 250+ talk pages that this template is used on. --RL0919 (talk) 21:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The bot is no longer active, but the template is used on 284 pages. So don't delete the template, instead let's use it to inform the people that is using it that Werdnabot is no longer running. So I have just updated the text of the template to say "Werdnabot is no longer running" and added a link to where Werdna himself says that. --David Göthberg (talk) 06:10, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Awesome idea. I would withdraw this deletion nomination, but I'm not sure how to. You can mark it as "withdrawn by nominator." Logan Talk Contributions 22:54, 19 November 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.
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 keep per WP:SNOW. --Coffee // have a cup // ark // 11:33, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New unreviewed article (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

We don't need a large banner at the top of the page to state that an article is new, and marking pages that have not been reviewed is what the patrol log is for. GW 17:35, 18 November 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.
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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indiana Hoosiers 2006 men's basketball roster (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphan template showing a non-notable roster for a college basketball team. RL0919 (talk) 15:07, 18 November 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.
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 Keep. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Powerpuff Girls (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Still partially redundant as it probably shouldn't be doing double duty for a spinoff which isn't related by enough to share a template. Aside from that, there is the issue of only having four functional links, all of which are readily relinked from each article. treelo radda 12:23, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Doesn't seem to be redundant to any other template, and has enough valid article links for a navbox. I don't see any reason why the original show and the spin-off can't be included in the same template. --RL0919 (talk) 14:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's redundant to all three articles in the navbox being well interlinked, there's little point in a navbox which offers no benefit to a reader which they can't already get on the same article. The spinoff could use its own navbox template or be mentioned as a spinoff here but not together, they're too disparate. treelo radda 15:16, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps it is my lack of familiarity with the particulars of these shows, but they don't seem so disparate to me that they can't share a navbox. Anyhow, I just wanted to note that I updated the TfD notice on the template to use {{Tfd}} instead of {{Tfd-inline}}, since this is a non-inline template. --RL0919 (talk) 23:47, 18 November 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.
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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:British Film Institute name (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Seems somewhat pointless and is currently unused. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:21, 18 November 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.
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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2 cell table row (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphaned template Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:18, 18 November 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.
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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 20:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Biasutti skin color map (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphaned template Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:13, 18 November 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.