Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 January 23

< January 22	January 24 >

January 23 edit

Template:Ifdef/ 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. Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Consider Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/Deleted/December 2005#Template: ifdef as precedent. --ReyBrujo 23:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's a misnamed template that seems to have been used as an example for {{ifdef}}, which was deprecated in favour of {{if}}, which was deprecated in favour of {{qif}}, which was deprecated in favour of ParserFunctions... I don't think we need this at the moment, and it doesn't have any obvious historical interest (like {{if}} and {{qif}} do). --ais523 13:33, 24 January 2007 (U T C)
Delete old cruft be gone TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 14:54, 24 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:Stephen King short stories 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 Circeus 15:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This template just lists the Stephen King short story collections. As Template:Stephen King has all of this along with much more, it is largely obselete. --CyberGhostface 20:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll agree to this so long as we can improve Template:Stephen King so that it doesn't have the short story collections listed as novels, but in its own separate section of the template. -- LGagnon 20:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Template:Stephen King and redirect. Angela . 20:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as Template:Stephen King now has an easy-to-read format separating novels from short fiction. Unless there is strong support for each type (novel, short fiction, non-fiction, audiobooks) each having a template. Pomte 21:39, 31 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:Colleges with Degrees validated or accredited by Dublin City University 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. Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as we already have the longstanding template:Dublin City University that had this information previously. Unneccessary duplication. Djegan 18:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per Djegan. Clearly unneeded. -- Pauric (talk-contributions) 19:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Guliolopez 03:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the reason Djegan suggested. Autarch 18:24, 2 February 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:In 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 Circeus 15:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as orphaned. Previously used in soccer result articles. --Punkmorten 12:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. ~Crazytales (IP locations!) 13:18, 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:Out 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 deleted by User:Circeus. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 18:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as orphaned. Previously used in soccer result articles. --Punkmorten 12:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. ~Crazytales (IP locations!) 13:18, 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:Second Fußball-Bundesliga Results - 2007 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. Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation template; all links in it were deleted as expired PRODs based on ample AFD precedent that Wikipedia is not a site for blow by blow soccer/football statistics. I've orphaned it as it was only used on one article other than the deleted ones. --GRBerry 04:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no question. Punkmorten 12:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. ~Crazytales (IP locations!) 13:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as above. --shanda 19:13, 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.