Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 December 18

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< December 17 December 19 >

December 18

edit

Culture of Country sidebars

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).

The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 25 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:19, 25 December 2016 (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).

Template:Created

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:24, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the purpose of having this template. It looks similar to {{unsigned}} or {{user}} or {{IP}}. Also, I don't know why the "creation log" link was given to notified people. It shows them logs of created articles, most of them deleted. I recently substituted the template anyway. Unless I see the purpose of using it, this template shall be deleted. George Ho (talk) 06:37, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:Created with R

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:16, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No longer transcluded. Therefore, it should be deleted. George Ho (talk) 06:32, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:CreatedFS

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).

The result of the discussion was Withdrawn by nom (non-admin closure) Pppery 02:23, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This notification template is no longer used as WP:featured sound candidates is inactive at the moment. It must be deleted. George Ho (talk) 06:31, 18 December 2016 (UTC); see below. 02:44, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is no "must". There's no point whatsoever with dismantling a process that we should have due to inactivity. Speedy Keep: Harmful to restarting the process if deleted, harmless if kept. Do the option that doesn't cause harm. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:16, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, Adam. How about deprecated instead or historical? Seems a better alternative than "keep" or "delete". Better? --George Ho (talk) 02:44, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I just don't see how any of them actually has any advantage. It's not like people are going to be stumbling across this. I simply don't think we should do things without any actual reason .Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:47, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at archives of WT:Featured sound candidates recently, Adam, you seem very dedicated to have FS restored. If Featured Sounds mean everything to you... I don't know. It hasn't been active since 2011. I'll tell you what... I'll withdraw this nomination, so I'll not touch it for a while. Fair? --George Ho (talk) 21:52, 23 December 2016 (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).

Template:1923–24 Ohio Athletic Conference men's basketball standings

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).

The result of the discussion was Keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:45, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:46, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:1924–25 Ohio Athletic Conference men's basketball standings

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).

The result of the discussion was Keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:45, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:46, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:2005 Baylor Lady Bears basketball navbox

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:22, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient player blue links to be useful navigation. ~ Rob13Talk 22:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:46, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:1952–53 MCHL standings (men)

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).

The result of the discussion was move to user space. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:17, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:17, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will use any/all of the MCHL, WIHL, WCHA, ECAC Hockey, etc... standings templates prior to 1970 when I am able to find the time to create the main pages for those seasons. In the meantime I've added links to some of the templates so that they aren't completely orphaned. PensRule11385 Talk 22:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:46, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:1951–52 MCHL standings (men)

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).

The result of the discussion was move to user space. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:17, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. ~ Rob13Talk 22:17, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See above — Preceding unsigned comment added by PensRule11385 (talk • contribs) 22:47, December 11, 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:46, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:Deodhar Trophy

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).

The result of the discussion was Keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:44, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only 4 blue links. GXXF T • C 12:24, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:41, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:Use MLA style

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Created 2012, unused. ~ Rob13Talk 00:37, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:Use APA style

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).

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:20, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Created 2012, unused. ~ Rob13Talk 00:37, 18 December 2016 (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).

Template:Asian Cuisine

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).

The result of the discussion was Relisted on 2016 December 25 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:22, 25 December 2016 (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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_December_18&oldid=756629663"