Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 February 18

< February 17	February 19 >

February 18 edit

Template:Persiraja Banda Aceh 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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Persiraja Banda Aceh (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Authors used template for grouping unrelated articles, however once they have been removed there are just two relevant pages. These two articles do not need a navbox. Cloudz 679 15:33, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NENAN. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 15:03, 24 February 2012 (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:Balaghat Railway Junction 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; deleted by Boing! said Zebedee (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Balaghat Railway Junction (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is an article , not a template Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:48, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Apparently a misguided user creation. Brad (talk) 22:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy as duplicate of Balaghat Junction. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:50, 19 February 2012 (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:Boya naidu 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. The db tagger called it a test page. I would call it vandalism. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Boya naidu (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is an article not a template Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Apparently a misguided user creation. Brad (talk) 22:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note. Possible copy-vio. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:52, 19 February 2012 (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:Box portal skeleton boya / boyar / gangawaru 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, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:02, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Box portal skeleton boya / boyar / gangawaru (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is an an article not a template! Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Apparently a misguided user creation. Brad (talk) 22:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note. Possible copy-vio.

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:G-?? 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. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:G-g (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:G-so (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:G-s (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:G-rn (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:G-mo (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:G-lm (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Set of unused link templates WOSlinker (talk) 13:56, 18 February 2012 (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:Full demo 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; deleted as G6 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:00, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Full demo (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No longer appears to be in use. WOSlinker (talk) 13:51, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with nom; unused template. Gongshow ^Talk 07:07, 21 February 2012 (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:Web-cite 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; deleted as G6 by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:08, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Web-cite (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated for four years, used only on three user subpages— copies of Buddhism that have not been edited for years -— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:01, 18 February 2012 (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:Hollowpoints 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; deleted as G8 by NawlinWiki (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Just red links. WOSlinker (talk) 10:49, 18 February 2012 (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:User cc-by-nc-sa 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, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:02, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User cc-by-nc-sa (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

NC Clause is not compatible with Wikipedia terms. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to speedy deletion template would be the better outcome. -- A Certain White Cat ^chi? 10:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Template states "This user's contributions are dual licensed under Wikipedia's copyright terms and Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0" so the grant of licence is compatible. However, at present I can't see why this dual licensing is useful. Thincat (talk) 10:55, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You either release a right or you don't. The template is license-confused. -- A Certain White Cat ^chi? 12:52, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete as unused Bulwersator (talk) 15:08, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The template says that the contributions are multi-licensed. →Σ τ c. 01:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That's irrelevant. We can't accept works under BY-NC, so we can't use those terms. It may be that other authors of images want to dual-license their works under both CC-BY-SA (for us) and commercial terms (for commercial parties): however, as we cannot use the latter, we need not include it here. Lastly, there is no reason that anyone would choose to use the work under BY-NC when the other license exists as it is by definition a less free license. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete, misrepresents policy and contradicts itself. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 15:04, 24 February 2012 (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:Charles Finch 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; deleted by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:02, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Charles Finch (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Shoud be an article if notable? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:53, 18 February 2012 (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.