Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 November 19

< November 18	November 20 >

November 19 edit

Template:Article section 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 on 2014 November 27. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:03, 27 November 2014 (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:India Village 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) 18:22, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:India Village (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

only used once (Tarwara). Frietjes (talk) 17:34, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete replace with {{infobox settlement}} -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 06:42, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/replace per IP —PC-XT+ 09:29, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as now orphaned. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:47, 22 November 2014 (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:RFC list footer 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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:56, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RFC list footer (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template previously directed users to a request board that was closed following this discussion. G. C. Hood (talk) 16:30, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep That template also contains a navbox and other still-current information. Why didn't you just edit it to remove the single outdated line? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as the reason for this TfD appears to have been removed —PC-XT+ 08:27, 24 November 2014 (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:Canine reproduction 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) 18:24, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Canine reproduction (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is not used. All content has been merged into Canine reproduction. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:17, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

move to article space, then redirect to preserve attribution. Frietjes (talk) 22:59, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Move and redirect per Frietjes —PC-XT+ 09:28, 22 November 2014 (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 Espoo district 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) 18:25, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Espoo district (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unnecessary wrapper of {{Infobox settlement}}, pertaining to suburbs of a single city. Unused, as I have just Subst: all instances. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete but have a bot cleanup Andy's sloppy substitution job which left parserfunctions in the articles. Frietjes (talk) 15:31, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Frietjes —PC-XT+ 08:22, 24 November 2014 (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:Miss Intercontinental 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) 18:53, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Miss Intercontinental (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused and empty navbox. All constituent articles were recently deleted at AfD. czar ♔ 04:19, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 15:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unused template. The only blue link has only a tenuous connection. • Gene93k (talk) 16:21, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unused and empty per nom —PC-XT+ 08:15, 24 November 2014 (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:Latest stable software release/MP3 Rocket 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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:56, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Latest stable software release/MP3 Rocket (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

We don't need the version number of this malware trojan horse. Elvey^(t•c) 01:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/MP3_Rocket AfD on the article itself. Why do we separate them? 71.19.161.130 (talk) 19:13, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; if the version number shouldt be includede it should be discussed on the talk page of the article. Christian75 (talk) 10:04, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per AfD outcome, and since possibly unpopular software is not always considered malware, but could be adware or other annoyances, even with an option to skip their installation, such as that Ask.com toolbar I saw mentioned on the talk page. It's no big secret that free software is sometimes supported by bundling PUP in the installer. It is better to find a source telling what the PUP actually is, (better, why it is unpopular,) and write that in the article. —PC-XT+ 07:52, 24 November 2014 (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.