Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 November 20

< November 19	November 21 >

November 20

Template:Country music tasks

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 section.

The result of the discussion was Never mind Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Country music tasks (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Very much out of date. Task list was redirected to main project, so this template is redundant as well. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:08, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, just as all the others. GlassCobra 18:51, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

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:Syndicate series

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 section.

The result of the debate was delete --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:18, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Syndicate series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to more complete {{Bullfrog Productions}} Cooper-42 (talk) 17:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - redundant to existing template. Terraxos (talk) 04:35, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, overly-specific and therefore redundant to the Bullfrog template. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:08, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

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:Germany squad 2004 UEFA European Under-21 Football Championship

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 section.

The result of the debate was Delete --The Helpful One 17:51, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Germany squad 2004 UEFA European Under-21 Football Championship (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Pre previous discussion, no need for squad template for youth competition. Matthew_hk tc 16:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - not sufficiently notable team to justify a template. Terraxos (talk) 04:34, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. – PeeJay 12:53, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

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:Smallcaps

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 section.

The result of the debate was Invalid: This discussion was not advertised on the template page, the template /doc subpage, or the template talk page. Deletion discussions must be advertised. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Smallcaps (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This purely-presentational template is purportedly for "name/surname disambiguation in lead sections, and all-caps words or pronounceable acronyms", but none of those require small caps and in few cases would it seem to be desirable. We shouldn't encourage users to experiment with presentational markup like this by having templates for it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

• Delete I don't see any case where small caps would be useful, except maybe on userspace or in a signature. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 17:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

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:CT-\d+

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 section.

The result of the debate was subst and then delete. JPG-GR (talk) 22:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Almost all of these can be easily replaced by CSS declarations. A few are simple enough they should just besubst'ed into the table style attribute where they are used. The few which do contain actual html tags should be moved to more descriptive titles if they are to be kept. I have no idea what the numbers mean in the names of these templates (possibly the order in which they were created). — CharlotteWebb 21:44, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

• Why is these templates similar?--Freewayguy 23:23, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
• Delete/subst, etc Really, I don't think most of these are necessary. They are not well-used, and there are too many of them for anyone to remember what they all do. This, that and the other _[talk] 09:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
• Comment As it happens, I'm just starting a self-project to re-do the table layout for various Unicode tables (discussion). I found this discussion when I went to look up what the templates did. The tables I'm targeting appear to be the chief (only?) things which use these templates, and when I'm done, they won't use them anymore. Hopefully that will be soon. FWIW, FYI, HAND, etc. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 03:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• Relisting. Unsure what the progress is on the project above. Also, not a whole lot of input for a large amount of templates. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 10:56, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

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:Butterflies of Indiana

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 section.

The result of the debate was Delete --The Helpful One 18:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Butterflies of Indiana (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The template lists many butterfly species with nearly cosmopolitan distribution and appears in respective butterfly articles (e.g. Vanessa atalanta), even if the butterfly is common throughout the Northern Hemisphere (as is the case with many of them), and not only in Indiana. As a list it might be useful, as a template it is misleading and useless. Template:Butterflies of Michigan is nominated as well for the same reasons. Colchicum (talk) 02:03, 20 November 2008 (UTC) Colchicum (talk) 02:03, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per my reasoning at Template:Butterflies of Michigan. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 17:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Per comments under next subheading (Template:Butterflies of Michigan)—GRM (talk) 13:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

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:Butterflies of Michigan

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 section.

The result of the debate was Delete --The Helpful One 18:16, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Butterflies of Michigan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The template lists many butterfly species with nearly cosmopolitan distribution and appears in every respective butterfly article (e.g. Nymphalis vaualbum), even if the butterfly is common throughout the Northern Hemisphere (as is the case with most of them), and not only in Michigan. As a list it might be useful, as a template it is misleading and useless. Colchicum (talk) 01:47, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Misleading, indeed. None of these is exclusive to Michigan. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 01:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. Template:Butterflies of Indiana suffers from the same problems. Colchicum (talk) 02:00, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Along with Template:Butterflies of Indiana. They would be used in far too many articles, and having a template on butterflies of each province/state would be far too much. As is now, they represent a US bias, these butterflies are also present in many provinces of Canada, and in Mexico. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 02:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Where would it end? We could have templates for species by continent, country, state... Useful as these might be to people living in those geographic regions, a link under "See also" to "List of butterflies in..." would be much cleaner—GRM (talk) 13:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Wasn't a good idea in the first place. Sorry. --IvanTortuga (talk) 21:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

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.