Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 January 22

< January 21	January 23 >

January 22 edit

Template:Nuclear Bomb Supporter 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 userfied ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 00:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially offensive and certainly not appropriate for the template namespace.--Azer Red Si? 23:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is a form of censorship if it is deleted. So what it might offend someone, if someone decides to place this on their user page then let them.--Lucy-marie 23:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Userfy polemic userbox that should not be in template space. Eluchil404 23:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy - to each his own ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 23:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now been userfied by myself so please de-list--Lucy-marie 00:29, 23 January 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 page.

Template:Lustra 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 deletion. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 00:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Little to no added value from this box. Does not point to valid links - mostly red links. AirOdyssey (Talk) 12:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete immedatly I think It Is pure and absolute nonsence and Is a strong candidate for a speedy deletion under the nonsence criteria.--Lucy-marie 23:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. It's useless having a template where most of the links are red. Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 01:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete if only because the page for Lustra (band) is a WP:COPYVIO of their MySpace page ... can you say, "{{db-band}}"? ... ROFL!! --72.75.104.44 03:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The Lustra (band) page has been deleted as of now, so the template doesn't even have its Raison d'Être. AirOdyssey (Talk) 06:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Somebody should also zap Breakfast at Tammy's while we're at it ... that's the last remaining bogus link in the template. --72.75.104.44 08:24, 28 January 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 page.

Template:Economy of Angola table 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 deletion. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 01:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Was only used on Economy of Angola. I substed it there, since I wanted to be able to use <ref> tags. Superm401 - Talk 08:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - already substed, redundant to {{Infobox Economy}} ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 23:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
'Speedy delete per Anetode. Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 01:55, 23 January 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 page.

Template:Mercury Template 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 deletion. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 01:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The template is better covered by the Template:Mercury Timeline, (30 vs 20 years); this one isn't even standarised. -- NaBUru38 20:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete - orphan, redundant ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 23:57, 22 January 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 page.