Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 July 19

< July 18	July 20 >

July 19

Template:Infobox SMF

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 T3 by Plastikspork (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 05:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox SMF (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not sure what if anything this was intended to be used for, but it doesn't seem to be used for anything. -- Selket ^Talk 22:37, 19 July 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:WakkaWiki

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) 02:42, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

doesn't link much. Frietjes (talk) 20:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are just two links in the template. A navbox is excessive, when a link in the See Also section should suffice.--SGCM (talk) 00:52, 24 July 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:Tpfd-1

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 CSD#T3. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:24, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tpfd-1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-1p1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-1p2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-1p3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-2p1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-2p2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-2p3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-2p4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-2s1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-3p1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-3p2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-3p3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-1s0 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-1s1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-3s023 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-3s1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-3s2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-4s13 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Tpfd-7s3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

back in the ancient past, we apparently didn't have "urlencode" and had to make a series of templates to manually urlencode our links. thankfully, these templates have all been replaced by one template, {{tpfr}}, so these can be safely deleted. Frietjes (talk) 20:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- Frietjes is right. None of them are used and can be just deleted. -- Selket ^Talk 15:01, 20 July 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:OPCS4.2

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) 02:45, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:OPCS4.2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

appears to not be that popular. Frietjes (talk) 19:35, 19 July 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:Historic structures

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) 02:46, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Historic structures (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused. Frietjes (talk) 19:26, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, England isn't the only place in the world with historic structures. -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 06:21, 22 July 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:JORF-law-copy

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) 02:46, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:JORF-law-copy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused. Frietjes (talk) 19:25, 19 July 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:Lawson

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) 02:46, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

A case of WP:TOOSOON and WP:NENAN. Only two directly related articles easily navigable from one to the other. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Too early. A template may be useful in future, when the band releases more albums. But as of now, a navbox is not necessary.--SGCM (talk) 00:53, 24 July 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:German title Baron

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) 02:47, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:German title Baron (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused. Frietjes (talk) 18:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unused, and it states the obvious. Most readers probably already know that Baron is a title and not a first or middle name, and we certainly don't need a template for it.--SGCM (talk) 01:09, 24 July 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:Markup2

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 G7 by Gadget850 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 01:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Markup2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused, undocumented, uncategorized. Frietjes (talk) 17:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. I was going somewhere with this, but it didn't work out. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 23:30, 19 July 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:YouTube original channels

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, this seems to be better covered by a category, due large number channels. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:54, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:YouTube original channels (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Oversized template of barely related topics, most of which aren't even notable enough to have an article. Otterathome (talk) 23:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Argh. Insane scope issues: this can never hope to be comprehensible, and is already uselessly overreaching. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

keep - The YouTube original channels are notable. They include SourceFed, The Wall Street Journal, Crash Course (YouTube), etc. Also most don't have their own channels because nobody has bothered to make them. I'm quite sure that you could make an article of most of the remaining ones such as SciShow[1][2][3][4] stan lee's world of heroes[5][6][7], comedy shaq network[8][9][10][11], the nerdist channel[12][13][14] Of course those are only SOME references of the SOME channels on the template left without a wikipedia article. Soulboost (talk) 20:26, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Wall Street Journal doesn't have an article, as well as a few of the other channels still listed. 117Avenue (talk) 04:58, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
delete, or at the very least, cut the non-links and redirects. Frietjes (talk) 20:34, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

now that the template has been cut down, I am leaning toward keep, but we should make sure that the links in the template are to actual articles about the channels, and not generic links to the company producing the channel with no information in the article about the channel. Frietjes (talk) 15:14, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Category:YouTube channels is a better list. 117Avenue (talk) 04:09, 24 July 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:Sachin fan

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 G7 by GB fan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:05, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sachin fan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Should be renamed to {{User Sachin fan}}, per Wikipedia:Userboxes#Which namespace? which states: "In the template namespace, userbox names must begin with "User ". DH85868993 (talk) 02:55, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question. Isn't this just an uncontroversial move? The handful of transclusions could be fixed in a moment. ^davidiad _.: 03:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe so, but if I move it, it will leave behind a redirect, which I would then have to nominate for deletion. So I figured I may as well just nominate the original template, and let the tools handle the move and the transclusions. DH85868993 (talk) 03:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As per my statement here, i have no problems with this deletion. Regards, Anir1uph | talk | contrib 09:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment OK, so that means there are now no transclusions and the creator has indicated they are happy for the template to be deleted. So does that mean it could be speedily deleted? DH85868993 (talk) 10:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all the above. ^davidiad _.: 19:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
normally I would say that userbox discussions go to WP:MFD, but given the author's approval for deletion, we can speedy delete it. Frietjes (talk) 15:16, 20 July 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:Peloponnese

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) 02:52, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. Purpose unclear (to me, anyway). DH85868993 (talk) 01:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Superseded by {{Kallikratis-Peloponnese}} which is helpful and actually used on its constituents' pages. ^davidiad _.: 01:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to newer template Template:Kallikratis-Peloponnese -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 05:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you see as the advantages of redirecting over deleting? DH85868993 (talk) 06:44, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Access via a shorter name. -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 07:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with redirect, although IMO a template with this name it should serve a better purpose: the Peloponnese as a whole (not the aministrative region) is a very distinct geographical, historical and even cultural entity. Until someone writes such a template, however, let's redirect to the admin. definition. Constantine ✍ 15:53, 25 July 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:Pelalawan

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) 02:50, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

No transclusions. Only one blue link, which is a stub article. I suspect it's unlikely the other linked articles will ever be created. DH85868993 (talk) 00:49, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per DH8. extra999 (talk) 14:23, 19 July 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.