Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2009 October 16

< October 15	October 17 >

October 16 edit

Template:Urban Bus Routes in Busan, Korea 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 03:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Urban Bus Routes in Busan, Korea (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphan navbox with 100% redlinks and no edits since creation in 2008. RL0919 (talk) 00:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Geschichte (talk) 09:05, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No potential for use due to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Busan Urban Bus Route No. 2. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:20, 17 October 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:Impeach 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 relisted at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Impeach (non-admin closure). --RL0919 (talk) 00:48, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

I have to ask, is a template such as this really appropriate? Irbisgreif (talk) 23:56, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong venue. Userboxes, regardless of namespace, are to be discussed at WP:MFD, not TFD. (A common mistake though, I've made it myself.) --RL0919 (talk) 00:07, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, Twinkle defaulted badly on me there. My apologies. Irbisgreif (talk) 00:21, 17 October 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:Uw-redlink 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 T2. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-redlink (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Can't image a reason to use this warning. And if it does ever comes up, just write a message instead. Garion96 (talk) 23:02, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that this is speedy-able as a misrepresentation of policy. Red-links are, as I recall, a good thing. Irbisgreif (talk) 23:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a WP:BITE violation. 76.66.194.183 (talk) 19:56, 17 October 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:2010 Atlantic hurricane season buttons 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 Garion96 (talk) 11:48, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2010 Atlantic hurricane season buttons (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navigational template that includes no pages, and won't be of realistic use until well into next year. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:19, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete with no prejudice against recreating it at a more appropriate time. The creator should also feel free to copy it into userspace, although there isn't anything hard to recreate in what's been done so far. --RL0919 (talk) 23:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think WP:CRYSTAL quite applies. After all, any event that cancels next year's hurricane season is likely to also cancel the project. I'd say that since they'll definitely be used, there's no point in deleting. Irbisgreif (talk) 00:20, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it can be recreated once the 2010 hurricane season starts. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:08, 23 October 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:Taxonomic references 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 keep. Garion96 (talk) 11:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Taxonomic references (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Providing links to lists of references is not the proper way to reference an article per WP:V or WP:CS. Many of these links lead to empty pages which clutters up the article. These empty links can not be removed from an individual article by hand as they are embedded in the template. The placement of references must be done by hand with respect to what needs cited in an individual article. If Taxonomic articles need a general reference to verify the subjects' existance than one should be directly linked from a bot. This template should be deleted as it does not encourage proper citing as per our policies. Them From Space 20:39, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The links are to highly reliable sources. It is preferable to have multiple references rather than a single one. Using a template means that a change or addition to the list of references can be done once rather than multiple times. Citations generated by this template are perfectly valid. There are many, many uses of this template, and deleting it would make the articles less useful. -- Eastmain (talk) 20:24, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Eastmain. While I agree with the nominator that direct cites are usually preferable to indirect ones, it would not improve the encyclopedia to delete this template and remove reliable sources from so many articles. Geometry guy 21:02, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete each of the three should be separate inline templates, not a single template, and this should not be used as a reference template in any case, it's just a set of external links, so should be only used in External links sections. Specific PubMed articles can be linked using {{PMID}} 76.66.194.183 (talk) 01:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, although this task can be done better by hand, this is no reason to remove something that is good enough for the job in most cases. Deleting the template would degrade the encyclopedia. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:11, 20 October 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:Taxonomic links 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 keep. Garion96 (talk) 11:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Taxonomic links (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template isn't needed because any external links which are related to a taxonomic article can and should be placed by hand with respect to each link's relevance to the particular article. The template gives many empty search results which can not be fixed in a particular article, and in order to remove these links the template itself must be edited. I can't say that any of the links on the template would meet WP:EL for every one of the articles that the template is designed for. Since many of the links generated fail our external links guidelines, and since the placement of external links shouldn't be done en masse by a template, this template should be deleted in favor of placing relevant links in these articles by hand. Them From Space 20:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Placing references by hand when they can be done using a template is a waste of time and runs the risk of introducing errors. The links are to highly reliable sources. It is preferable to have multiple references rather than a single one. Using a template means that a change or addition to the list of references can be done once rather than multiple times. Citations generated by this template are perfectly valid. There are many, many uses of this template, and deleting it would make the articles less useful. -- Eastmain (talk) 20:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Eastmain. While I agree with the nominator that in general external links should be minimized and placed by hand, in this case the external links are to highly reliable sources and are a net benefit to the reader, and hence to the encyclopedia. Geometry guy 21:02, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But most of the links placed in these templates do not even meet our external links guidelines. Them From Space 22:15, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per Eastmain. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:12, 20 October 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:PIqaD 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) 18:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Old template for marking Klingon text, replaced by {{Lang}}. Deprecated since July 2007 and thoroughly orphaned. Time to delete this petaQ. RL0919 (talk) 18:17, 16 October 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:Novelinfoboxincomp 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) 18:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Old project cleanup tag, now replaced by {{NovelsWikiProject}}. Deprecated since July 2007 and not transcluded on any pages. RL0919 (talk) 18:07, 16 October 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:TestTemplatesList 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) 18:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Broken old sidebar list of warning templates. Deprecated since January 2007 and not transcluded on any pages. RL0919 (talk) 16:47, 16 October 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:Storm pics 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) 18:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Storm pics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Old template replaced by {{Infobox Hurricane Small}}. Deprecated since December 2006. No transclusions. RL0919 (talk) 15:05, 16 October 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:PerTranslit 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) 18:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Old template for marking transliterated Persian text, replaced by {{Lang}}. Deprecated for two years and not transcluded on any pages. RL0919 (talk) 15:01, 16 October 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:GSL 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) 18:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Orphan attribution template from 2004. The description of the GNU Scientific Library in its article does not suggest it will be a fruitful source of encyclopedia articles. If this is used by substitution, I'll be happy to withdraw the nom, but there is no documentation or talk page discussion to indicate that. RL0919 (talk) 14:50, 16 October 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:Imidazopyridines 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 this and prior discussion. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Orphan navbox. It only has three articles, which isn't enough to justify a navbox to begin with, and it isn't even used on those three. RL0919 (talk) 14:37, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Geschichte (talk) 09:06, 17 October 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:Academy Award nominees and winners by year 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) 18:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Academy Award nominees and winners by year (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

After a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Film awards task force#List of academy award winners and nominees to merge several Academy Award articles, this template has now become unused and orphaned, and now lists a bunch of redirects. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Orphaned. Garion96 (talk) 16:42, 19 October 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.