Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 December 1

< November 30	December 2 >

December 1 edit

Template:Traumahawk - HCD Palm Beach County 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) 04:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Traumahawk - HCD Palm Beach County (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only used on one article, should be substituted and then deleted. WOSlinker (talk) 21:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete after substituting per nom. Mhiji (talk) 14:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom. Rehman 11:50, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete used only on one article. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 17:35, 4 December 2010 (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:Fb competition 2010-11 Relegation playoffs 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. WOSlinker (talk) 18:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fb competition 2010-11 Relegation playoffs (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Pointless! Mhiji (talk) 19:19, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep! Rehman 11:51, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it is now orphaned by replacement of {{Fb cl2 qr}} with {{Fb cl3 qr}} in the article transcluding the template. By the way, we have way too many of these Fb templates, and the naming convention is completely indecypherable. Someone should merge these? 134.253.26.12 (talk) 19:37, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom. The name of the template is longer than the actual content! --vgmddg (look | talk | do) 00:27, 4 December 2010 (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:—wrap 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 Separate. WOSlinker (talk) 18:20, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:—wrap (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:–wrap (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:—wrap with Template:–wrap. Duplicate. Mhiji (talk) 18:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose exactly how are they duplicate? One is an ndash, the other is an mdash. We even have guidelines on their use WP:DASH. And where would you merge it? {{-wrap}} (hyphen wrap ; which doesn't exist for some reason) {{--wrap}} (double hyphen wrap) {{−wrap}} (minus wrap) ? 65.93.13.216 (talk) 05:21, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But what's the point of having two templates that do the same job? Surely one should redirect to the other? Mhiji (talk) 14:28, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, I agree with the IP, it is different. Look closer. Rehman 15:06, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, as long as there is a difference between en dash and em dash, having both is useful. See MOS:DASH. 134.253.26.12 (talk) 19:40, 3 December 2010 (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:Specialist police units of the United Kingdom 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) 04:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Specialist police units of the United Kingdom (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not used anywhere, refers to three completely different types of body and replicated by Template:Garda Síochána, Template:UK home nations police forces and Template:Specialist police units of Britain. ninety:one 17:29, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Mhiji (talk) 18:09, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom. Rehman 11:52, 3 December 2010 (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:Talkbackalien 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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 10:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, unnecessary template. Mhiji (talk) 17:12, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Rehman 15:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The template code and the documentation were copy-pasted from {{talkback}}, and this template does nothing that talkback doesn't (except changes the image from one that expresses communication to one that doesn't). -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 16:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom. The problem itself has actually been partially solved with {{Wormhole}}. On the plus side I do like the graphic. ; ) --vgmddg (look | talk | do) 00:13, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unused and simply useless. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 17:36, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as needless variation. Creator notified. --Bsherr (talk) 03:35, 9 December 2010 (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:Rep 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. WOSlinker (talk) 18:24, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Various unused templates. Mhiji (talk) 13:26, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, after substituting. Rehman 11:56, 3 December 2010 (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:Thankyou 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 Redirect Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unnecessary template. Very few transclusions. Should be substituted and then redirected to {{Thank you}} to avoid confusion. Mhiji (talk) 13:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Template:Thank you, per nom. I think what it's attempting to do is too generic—e.g., "Your apology or cleanup was greatly appreciated." (emphasis added). The few transclusions can be substed. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 16:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Black Falcon, and delete its useless talkpage redirect. Rehman 11:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge {{Thankyou}}, {{Thank You IP}} and {{Wikithanks}} into {{Thank you}}. --vgmddg (look | talk | do) 23:03, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support this. Mhiji (talk) 23:12, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Rehman. The underlying template ought to be deleted for the reasons given by Black Falcon, but the actual name ought to be a redirect as a spacing variation. --Bsherr (talk) 03:27, 9 December 2010 (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:Promotional Products Businesses 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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 10:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Promotional Products Businesses (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not much navigation with only one or two links. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Rehman 10:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Mhiji (talk) 12:39, 1 December 2010 (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:Promotional Products 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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 10:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Promotional Products (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not much navigation with only one or two links. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Rehman 10:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Mhiji (talk) 12:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Indeed, not useful. --Bsherr (talk) 03:29, 9 December 2010 (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:Motorsport in 2011 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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 10:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Motorsport in 2011 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Usage of this template has never been clearly established in its 2009 & 2010 versions, neither has an inclusion criteria for what 2011 motorsport season articles can be included. Is poorly named (some categories listed are not international), has been subject of edit warring. Until such time as an inclusion criteria can be established (discussion currently underway at Template talk:Motorsport in 2010#"Previous Consensus"?. Doing this in an attempt to prevent further perpetuation of NPOV and edit warring. Falcadore (talk) 02:14, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Easy to edit war, also the criteria for international motorsport is vague, as there is no definition. Some of these listed are not international even if they visit one country (V8 Supercar and H1 Unlimited), does this make them international. Since when Sprint Cup was international, they never ventured outside the US for a start. Donnie Park (talk) 07:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per Donnie. Rehman 12:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, Can I also recommend nominating this template (Template:Motorsport in the UK) for deletion as it is no better either for the same reason as the nom. Donnie Park (talk) 17:04, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: All of these arguments can also be applied to Template:Motorsport in 2009 and Template:Motorsport in 2010; should they also be deleted? --Spyder_Monkey (Talk) 18:05, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, and Template:Motorsport in 2009 and Template:Motorsport in 2010 as well. Little chance of establishing a meaningful criteria means there will be a constant stream of editors adding and removing series based on personal preferences. Kuguar03 (talk) 00:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reply to comments - anyone know how to incorporate the 2009 & 2010 rtemplates into the discussion? --Falcadore (talk) 00:32, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reply Reply - There's some directions for a multiple AfD here: WP:BUNDLE, but I don't know if that'll work here. Since this discussion has been going on for a week already it might not be correct to include them here, but rather list separately. Kuguar03 (talk) 00:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reply: let this TfD run its course then decide whether to list 2010 and 2009 based on the outcome. --Falcadore (talk) 02:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as per above, and possibly replace with something more specific, and with a proper inclusion criteria! Calistemon (talk) 06:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all 3 per above. Mhiji (talk) 06:34, 7 December 2010 (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:KLFsg 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. WOSlinker (talk) 18:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unnecessary template. Only 2 transclusions. Should be substituted then deleted. Mhiji (talk) 01:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Rehman 10:44, 1 December 2010 (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:Shannara character 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) 01:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Shannara character (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary template. Mhiji (talk) 01:18, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. Rehman 10:47, 1 December 2010 (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:Infobox Exalted City-States 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) 01:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Exalted City-States (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary template. Mhiji (talk) 00:35, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, don't see any use of it. Rehman 10:46, 1 December 2010 (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:Infobox SG rail museum 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. As per G7 criteria. WOSlinker (talk) 18:42, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox SG rail museum (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary template. Mhiji (talk) 00:09, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete says the editor who created it. It's purpose is no longer needed. WuhWuzDat 06:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete under G7, per above. Rehman 10:45, 1 December 2010 (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.