Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 17

< June 16	June 18 >

June 17 edit

Template:Broadway-show 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 in favor of Template:Infobox Musical --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 19:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This template, too, is outdated by Template:Infobox Musical 2 or Template:Infobox Play. Having a template dedicated solely to Broadway productions is counterproductive in avoiding systemic bias. Delete after orphaning — Music Maker 23:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete after orphaning --omtay38 00:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after orphaning -- Andrew4010 02:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after orphaning per nom. -- Ssilvers 04:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- This template has been essentially orphaned. — Music Maker 18:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This template is a lot more complete than infobox Play. I don't see how it could be considered progress to delete this and replace it with an infobox containing much less information. Jeffpw 10:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason this template is more "complete" than others is because it is production specific. It has fields for awards and actors that have only been achieved by one production of a play or musical. WikiProject Musical Theatre has spent a great deal of time developing Template:Infobox Musical 2 attempting to make it not production specific. Cheers! --omtay38 16:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Using Template:Infobox Play allows the infobox to represent the play as a work of literature, as opposed to focusing on a specific production of the play. — Music Maker 04:28, 21 June 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 Musical 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 move Infobox Musical 2 to Infobox Musical (which requires a deletion first) --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 10:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This template has been replaced by Template:Infobox Musical 2, a more generalized infobox. The current infobox allows for the inclusion of only one major production, adding to systemic bias. The new infobox is more specialized to the specific show, and not any one production. Delete after orphaning — Music Maker 23:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete after orphaning --omtay38 00:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If deleted (after all transclusions are fixed), the new template should be moved back to the location of the original template, as it is unintuitive to have this template at Infobox Musical 2. --- RockMFR 01:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. — Music Maker 01:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also agreed --omtay38 01:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. bibliomaniac 15 ^{BUY NOW!} 01:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. -- Ssilvers 05:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, This template has been orphaned. — Music Maker 00:54, 22 June 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 New Zealand Town 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. Pax:Vobiscum 17:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Was only used on one page. Has now been replaced there with {{Infobox Settlement}}, which it duplicates, Original author "[doesn't] mind either way as to whether it is used or deleted" (so speedy?). — Andy Mabbett 20:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This template serves a too specific purpose and the {{Infobox Settlement}} accomplishes the job more generally. - Andrew4010 06:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant. –Pomte 16:05, 24 June 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:Coors dm 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. Richard 07:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After 18 months since its creation, this was only being used by a handful of pages, I have substituted the newer {{coord}} (as used on tens of thousands of pages); this is now unused. — Andy Mabbett 19:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The template has been succeeded by {{coord}}. ~ Wiki hermit 22:03, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree as well. There is no use for this template anymore. Andrew4010 06:23, 18 June 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:East Germany Squad 1976 Olympics 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(One, two, Charlotte's comin' for you) 03:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Significant consensus against all national squad templates except for World Cups. This seems to be the last (for now). — Neier 12:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Some other recent TFD results can be seen at this page - Neier 12:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, then it is a standart template.--212.201.56.140 13:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per consensus to keep only World Cup templates. slυмgυм [ ←→ ] 21:26, 23 June 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:S-usurp 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. Pax:Vobiscum 17:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For reasons of standardisation and in order to make them easier to remember, we believe that all succession box templates should have a three-letter name. The name we have preferred for this is Template:S-urp and s-usurp redirects to it. It is a new template and has hardly ever been used; it is not present anywhere in the main namespace. Thus, on behalf of WikiProject Succession Box Standardization, I propose this template for deletion. Waltham, The Duke of 08:35, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This should probably be at Redirects for discussion or tagged with {{Db-g6}}, but delete anyway. –Pomte 08:44, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Template is redundant to Template:s-urp.
–Whale y land ( Talk • Contributions ) 18:14, 18 June 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:Zappaz:Welcome 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(One, two, Charlotte's comin' for you) 03:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a templated welcome message created and used by only one editor, who has been inactive since January 2006. The template has no incoming links and is redundant to various other, more general welcome messages. Delete. Black Falcon ^(Talk) 07:35, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It's only usable by one editor, and he's not editing. It's also very redundant. Self-explanatory delete. --Haemo 07:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy with a note on the user's talk page about its new location in case they come back. Wikipedia should be timeless; people can pick up editing whenever from where they left off. The welcome links are certainly still the same today. –Pomte 08:41, 17 June 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.