Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 August 17

< August 16	August 18 >

August 17 edit

Template:Former F3 Driver 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. matt br 12:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This template is unused and redundant next to other driver infoboxes that offer the same or better functionality.. Adrian M. H. 23:02, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:25, 18 August 2007 (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:Corinthians Junior Team squad 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete the template. Please take articles to WP:AFD. matt br 12:54, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Youth players are not notable. I don't see how a template for a whole youth squad could be. —Lesfer ^(t/c/@) 13:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and delete all players who haven't played first-team football. Punkmorten 13:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and delete per Punkmorten. Neier 13:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this template and take other pages to WP:AFD. Carlosguitar 05:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Number 5 7 08:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. An unnecessary template as youth players are not notable per se. --Malcolmxl5 20:54, 24 August 2007 (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:Luxembourg coat 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Singu larity 03:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Explicitly disallows commercial use, therefore we cannot have this. Not used. MER-C 11:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; nominator said it all. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, agreed with MER-C. Carlosguitar 04:58, 20 August 2007 (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:JamaicaCrownCopyright 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete, as well as the images. Singu larity 03:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright page explicitly disallows commercial use, therefore we can't have this. Only used in Image:Honours badge3.jpg, Image:JamaicaOrderoftheNation.jpg and Image:Jamaican Order of Merit.jpg, which should be speedied as csd i3. MER-C 11:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not only does it not allow commercial use, there are vague restrictions on modification as well. Clearly not a free license. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:20, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I left a neutral note (diff) on Evadb's, the editor who created the template, talk page, notifying him or her of this request for deletion. --Iamunknown 15:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per reasons listed above. Sorry.--Eva ^bd 18:38, 23 August 2007 (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:CACrownCopyright2 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. matt br 13:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright page explicitly disallows commercial use, therefore we can't have this. Only used in Image:Cvsm-l.gif and Image:Nvsm-l.gif, which should be speedied as csd i3. MER-C 11:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not only does it not allow commercial use, there are vague restrictions on modification as well. Clearly not a free license. — Gavia immer (talk) 13:18, 17 August 2007 (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 sportscar championship 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. matt br 13:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This template is redundant next to Template:Infobox Sports Car Championship, which is in use. The fields are very similar and no articles use this template, so a redirect is not necessary. Adrian M. H. 10:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Delete - per nom. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:31, 18 August 2007 (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:Late Night Poker Winners 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 page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Mike Peel 18:36, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - over-templatization. Winners of a particular poker tournament can be listed in the tournament article without the need for a template. — Otto4711 03:28, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - There are a lot of these navigation templates, I don't see why this one should be singled out for deletion. - PatrikR 22:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The template is used a navigational device to other winners of the tournament from the players article as well as a link to the tournament article, it is collapsible and is non-intrusive to the main space of the article ▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡^Talk 00:36, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is intrusive because of the number of templates that accumulate. Phil Hellmuth for instance has three of these on his article already. Otto4711 14:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The three navboxes autocollapse, and are at the bottom of the article. Hardly intrusive. Also, Phil Hellmuth is a special case. He's one of the most successful poker players in history, no surprise that he's got several of these templates. It's not unique on Wikipedia either. For example, Bill Clinton has four navboxes, and George W. Bush has six. - PatrikR 19:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is I think a bit of a qualitative difference between the navtemplates for "President of the United States" and "Governors of Arkansas" and this one. If there is no better reason for keeping this template than "there are lots of other templates" then that's not really all that compelling of an argument. Otto4711 12:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! I kind of knew you'd go there... I picked American presidents as examples only because I figured I'd find plenty of navboxes there. The fact that you like one and dislike another doesn't matter. See WP:IDONTLIKEIT. - PatrikR 16:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like poker players a hell of a lot better than I like US Presidents, so this "I don't like it" accusation is baseless and bizarre. Noting that there is an enormous qualitative difference between two things does not in any way mean anything like "I don't like it." It does mean that "President of the United States" is a bit more important organizationally in an encyclopedia than "won one of a handful of TV poker tournaments." If you want to actually discuss the concept instead of playing silly little games of gotcha, feel free. Otto4711 18:13, 23 August 2007 (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:Greeneville SC shopping malls 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. matt br 13:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary template for malls in Greenville, South Carolina. ~~Four bluelinks,~~ One bluelink, ~~but only one actually points to a page about a South Carolina mall. (Two point to malls in Georgia, and one points to a disambig.).~~ The template previously included Avondale and Cobb Center malls, which were never in Greenville, South Carolina. Currently, the template only includes one bluelink, and I doubt any of the defunct malls were ever notable enough to have articles written. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?)} 02:21, 17 August 2007 (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.