Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 March 21

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< March 20 March 22 >

March 21 edit

Templates on Wikipedia:Wikiproject Fun comment 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).

The result of the discussion was Delete. This is being discussed in two places (Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikiproject Fun comment templates) and between them delete seems to prevail. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:12, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:No can do (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Give me time (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Have coffee (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:But (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:I agree (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Hello IP (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:LOL (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:I say (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Lets talk (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Ban hammer (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Heya (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Guidance (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

These templates have only one transclusion which is on Wikipedia:Wikiproject Fun comment templates (which is going under deletion at MFD) and most are duplicates of other templates -KAP03(Talk • Contributions • Email) 23:55, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • "clerk" question KAP03, I'm assuming you want all of the templates listed in this nomination? Primefac (talk) 01:21, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, just wanted to check. Some people want them all in separate noms. Primefac (talk) 01:33, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @KAP03: Also adding the header message box. — Train2104 (t • c) 02:07, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • another clerk note these aren't all 100% unused, though obviously they would be easy to subst. Primefac (talk) 01:34, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep   Sir! I do say:lolI didn't say keep inWikipedia:Wikiproject Fun comment templates, however, these templates can be used. maybe Template:Done/See also? ProDuct0339sayworkproj 09:07, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Procedural note: "Comment on content, not the contributor" etc etc, but for anyone who's not aware these templates are all the work of a single indefinitely-blocked long-term troll, and have never been used by anyone other than by him (the transclusions of {{but}} are the result of partially-translated imports from fr-wiki as they have an unrelated template of the same name). ‑ Iridescent 17:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as disruptive. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:15, 25 March 2017 (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:Knight's Cross recipients of the 65th ID 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 soft delete. See below. Primefac (talk) 03:36, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient navigation. After the red links have been removed and articles on nn subjects redirected to alphabetical lists, only two actual articles remain.

Per the recent discussion (Redirect proposal for Knight's Cross winners), it's highly unlikely that the removed subjects would be considered notable in the future and the template is not needed. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:32, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: This should probably just be kept to a single navbox for Knight's Cross recipients or one broken down into the Wehrmacht's respective branches. —Vami_IV✠ 06:40, 31 March 2017 (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:Knight's Cross recipients of the 60th ID 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 soft delete. See below. Primefac (talk) 03:35, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient navigation. After the red links have been removed and articles on nn subjects redirected to alphabetical lists, only two actual articles remain.

Per the recent discussion (Redirect proposal for Knight's Cross winners), it's highly unlikely that the removed subjects would be considered notable in the future and the template is not needed. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:32, 21 March 2017 (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:Knight's Cross recipients of the 17th SS PGD 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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Should the proposal be overturned at some later date, then this template can be undeleted. Primefac (talk) 03:33, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No entries that are stand-alone articles. After the red links have been removed and articles on nn subjects redirected to alphabetical lists, only two names remain, which are both redirects to a list themselves.

Per the recent discussion (Redirect proposal for Knight's Cross winners), it's highly unlikely that the removed subjects would be considered notable in the future and the template is not needed. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2017 (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).

Hollyoaks family navigational 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Primefac (talk) 03:30, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NENAN and WP:TFD#REASONS. These templates are redundant to Template:Hollyoaks characters, which lists all the characters with articles. JuneGloom07 Talk 20:11, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - These templates only serve as clutter to one subject. There is one main navbox which includes all articles and these are redundant.Rain the 1 10:55, 28 March 2017 (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:Medicine disambiguation 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. Primefac (talk) 03:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. Has existed since 2013, and clearly hasn't caught on. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:47, 21 March 2017 (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:Open tunings 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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 03:32, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unused Frietjes (talk) 15:29, 21 March 2017 (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:Street Fighter chronology 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. Primefac (talk) 03:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation provided by Template:Street Fighter series, appears to be unused to boot. Izno (talk) 12:49, 21 March 2017 (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:Sigma Gamma Rho Grand Basilei 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. Primefac (talk) 03:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No navigable links. Used only in the head article Sigma Gamma Rho, where it is inappropriately placed in the middle of the page as a sort of embedded list. The content could in theory be moved there, but a long list of non-notable people doesn't seem like encyclopedic content. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • merge the list with the article, and delete the template. Frietjes (talk) 21:14, 22 March 2017 (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:WikiProject Advanced Space Civilizations (Media)Userbox 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 nominator. Added to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Advanced Space Civilizations (Media). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:50, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused userbox for a WikiProject which never got off the ground. Project itself is nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Advanced Space Civilizations (Media). BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:52, 21 March 2017 (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:Komplisert mal 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. Primefac (talk) 03:16, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template, last edited in 2008. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:22, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, we don't need it, and not in English. Frietjes (talk) 21:11, 22 March 2017 (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:Stock sound effects 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. Primefac (talk) 03:37, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NENAN. Howie scream was redirected, so this now has only 4 articles of relevance. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:41, 21 March 2017 (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:Florida Agricultural College football coach 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. Primefac (talk) 03:16, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Two links is not enough to navigate... fails WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 02:38, 21 March 2017 (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:Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association men's basketball coach 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. Primefac (talk) 03:15, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template doesn't link to anything. Also, you cannot assume that Division III college basketball coaches are notable. These programs get minimal coverage outside the local paper. These coaches would remain redlinks. Rikster2 (talk) 00:37, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom an WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 00:52, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete A navbox box without links fails the very purpose of a navbox. To link articles....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:14, 23 March 2017 (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/2017_March_21&oldid=1141875672"