Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 April 13
April 13
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) 22:28, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
The club was dissolved Alex (talk) 23:04, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- 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 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:28, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
- Template:FC Lviv squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
The club was dissolved Alex (talk) 23:02, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- 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 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:20, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Single use template with dubious value: WP is not a directory, nor a travel site. Even if the info is deemed important enough, then it would be better to present it in a list format in the article Hoorn railway station. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 22:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Single use and cannot be used for other railway stations on the railway. CRwikiCA talk 02:38, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Single use template. Hoorn looks to be rather randomly chosen as it not the endpoint of any railway line (with the exception of the heritage tram line Steamtrain Hoorn Medemblik) The Banner talk 16:10, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
- 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 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
There's only 1 article on a work by this writer. No need for a navbox. INeverCry 19:07, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- delete Frietjes (talk) 14:14, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
- 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.
Orphaned largest U.S. cities templates
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 discussion Magioladitis (talk) 18:49, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
- Template:Largest cities of Arizona (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Colorado (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Florida (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Idaho (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Indiana (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Iowa (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Kansas (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Kentucky (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Louisiana (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Maine (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Massachusetts (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Minnesota (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Mississippi (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Missouri (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Montana (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Nebraska (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of New Jersey (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of New Mexico (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of North Carolina (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of North Dakota (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Ohio (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Oklahoma (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Oregon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Pennsylvania (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of South Dakota (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Tennessee (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Utah (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Vermont (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Virginia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Washington (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of West Virginia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Largest cities of Wyoming (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Orphaned, unused templates. Same reason as the TFD discussion regarding the orphaned {{Largest cities of New Hampshire}}. In addition, many of these templates like {{Largest cities of Idaho}} look like they were abandoned since the "county" column was never completely filled out. Furthermore, many of these templates link to, and thus seem to be based on, an unreliable personal website instead of something more official like the U.S. Census (see also this TFD discussion last year) Zzyzx11 (talk) 15:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete In line with my arguments for other similar templates. They are redundant with already existing navboxes and do not offer additional navigational value. WP:TCREEP applies if these templates would be used. Navboxes are also not meant to be mini-articles. CRwikiCA talk 15:02, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete; these templates are redundant and arbitrary. Powers T 17:11, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete all per CRwikiCA. --Polaron | Talk 04:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
- delete Frietjes (talk) 16:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep but Clean Up These are useful templates, but they need to be cleaned up! Someone needs to put the counties for all of those cities.
- How would that help? How are they useful? Powers T 13:27, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
- 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 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Looks like a single use template of which the text easily can be included on the dp targetted. The Banner talk 13:02, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- I created this template in order to transclude some "see also" entries between Derive (disambiguation), Derived (disambiguation), and Derivative (disambiguation). I thought that this would be less tedious than manually adding these entries to each of the three articles. Jarble (talk) 15:18, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Subst and delete if Jarble needed such a template, it should have been a navbox. -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 05:28, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- The correct approach here would be to consolidate the obviously-overlapping dab pages in question into a single article. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:07, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. The last 4 entries are search strings which don't need to be added to the DAB pages. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 03:55, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
- Nice idea, but I think it's better to just add the required entries on each page. We don't really need all of them in each case (this was making links that led back to the pages they were on, as well as an unnecessary number of intitle lines - we don't need intitles for all the related terms, only for the particular term(s) for the page we're on). I've replaced the template on all three pages with what I think is enough for the see also section. Victor Yus (talk) 18:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
- 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.