Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 September 28

< Wikipedia:Templates for deletion‎ | Log
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2008 September 28)
< September 27 September 29 >

September 28 edit


Number one singles in the United Kingdom templates

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 category and everything in it -- this is a lot of pages, but it looks from here and the very similar #1 singles by country discussions from Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 September 27 that consensus is clear to delete, and I see no objections to their deletion. delldot ∇. 06:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1988 UK number one singles(edit talk links history) and
Category:Number one singles in the United Kingdom templates(edit talk links history) per WP:CDP

nominated for deletion: There is no reason or use for all of these (so far beginning with the year 1988 onwards)... all are filled with duplicate information. The lists of UK number-one songs already have articles (such as List of number-one singles from the 2000s (UK), etc.) and in addition all individual number-one song articles are categorized under "Number-one singles in the United Kingdom". Aside from this template being placed on all UK number-one song articles, it is only a matter of time before a huge mess ensues — no doubt following these will be templates for the U.S., Ireland, Germany, Australia, etc. etc. etc. The templates are obviously still under construction, so I propose deleting all of these now, including the one for 2009 (!!!). The parent category for the templates would not be needed either, if these are done away with. eo (talk) 22:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the same reasons I nominated the U.S. ones yesterday. These templates fail one of the basic premises of navigational templates: Navigation templates provide navigation between related articles. These songs are not related to one another. Aspects (talk) 23:08, 28 September 2008 (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 Croatian 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 06:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Croatian Town (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used once only. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:19, 28 September 2008 (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 Govindpura 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 06:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Govindpura (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used once twice. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC) Update: Unused. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits[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 Philmont camps 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 06:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Philmont camps (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only used twice. Redundant? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:14, 28 September 2008 (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 ROC county-controlled city 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 06:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox ROC county-controlled city (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used once only. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:12, 28 September 2008 (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:Novi Sad municipalities 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 06:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Novi Sad municipalities (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used once twice. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:10, 28 September 2008 (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:Comune 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 19:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used once only. Not in English. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:07, 28 September 2008 (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 Alevik 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 06:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Alevik (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used once only. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:01, 28 September 2008 (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 Bhopal 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 05:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Bhopal (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Single-use only. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:00, 28 September 2008 (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 Italian comune 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 05:57, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Italian comune (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Unused. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:55, 28 September 2008 (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 Macedonian village 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 05:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Macedonian village (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used only once. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:50, 28 September 2008 (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 Metro Cebu 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 05:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Metro Cebu (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used only once. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:45, 28 September 2008 (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 Municipality of Mexico 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 05:28, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Municipality of Mexico (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used only twice. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:43, 28 September 2008 (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 Russian federal city 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 section.

The result of the debate was no consensus. delldot ∇. 05:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Russian federal city (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used only twice. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong oppose. It is only used twice because there are only two federal cities in Russia. {{Infobox Settlement}} is not a good replacement, as it does not allow to group pertinent data in a way that makes sense for a federal city.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please can you describe these differences in more detail, say why they are so important, and indicate why this matters for these two cities, but not others? Why will {{{Infobox Russian city}} not suffice? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:56, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • {{Infobox Russian city}} will not suffice because Russian federal cities are not just cities, they are federal subjects as well. This template is actually a cross-breed of {{{Infobox Russian city}} and {{Infobox Russian federal subject}}, so it cannot be properly replaced with either of these two, or with {{Infobox Settlement}}. Creating a separate template for just two federal cities may seem silly on the surface, but considering that none of the existing templates are a good match, the only alternatives are to either hard-code this infobox in, which is not very user-friendly to editors, or to expand {{Infobox Russian city}} so it would allow special formatting for federal cities, which would push the template expand limits up across all articles about the Russian cities/towns. Please let me know if there are further points that need to be clarified.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:24, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, please answer "Please can you describe these differences in more detail"; by which I mean which extra fields are involved? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:39, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Both Infobox Russian city and Infobox Russian federal city are thoroughly documented, so it would have only been a matter of comparing the parameter sets for you. In any case, the differences are in the following parameters of the Infobox Russian federal city which are not needed in the Infobox Russian city: FederalDistrict, EconomicRegion, and CodeNumber (federal subject's land cadaster number). Looking from the opposite side, Infobox Russian city has the FederalSubject parameter, which does not apply to federal cities (as those are federal subjects in their own right), InJurisdictionOf parameter (federal subjects are on the top level of Russia's political divisions), AdmCtrType/AdmCtrOf (do not apply, as the federal cities are self-contained), and MunStatus (federal cities have municipal divisions, but are not municipal units themselves). As you see, the differences are most certainly reconcilable, but the easiest way to reconcile them is to create a separate template just for the federal cities, which is exactly what we have now. Please let me know if you need anything else.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Thank you. It seems that {{Infobox Russian federal city}} should be merged into {{Infobox Russian city}}. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 16:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • Like I previously said, it wouldn't be an efficient solution. Such a merger would require addition of several new parameters to Infobox Russian city as well as a mechanism of suppressing the parameters which do not apply to cities/federal cities. Doing so, while certainly a doable task, would, however, push the expand limits of the new template way up, and considering that Infobox Russian city can be used in over 1,000 articles (vs. federal cities' two), we'd be doing more harm than good. Making 1,000+ articles load slower just so we could get rid of this infobox? How is that an improvement?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?). SkyBonTalk\Contributions 15:22, 1 October 2008 (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 Slovakian municipality 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 05:11, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Slovakian municipality (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Unused. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:38, 28 September 2008 (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 Town DK 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 05:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Town DK (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used only once. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:35, 28 September 2008 (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:Japan dam 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 02:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Japan dam (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox dam}}. Only three instances. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:32, 28 September 2008 (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 Ancient Egyptian monument 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. I'm substing the one transclusion, if someone knows of a better template that can be used to replace it. delldot ∇. 07:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Ancient Egyptian monument (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant; only one instance. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you must convert it first and if everything is ok, this template can be speedy deleted. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Convert it to what? (and please note: this is a wiki; anyone can do so, not just me, and including you!). Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 09:46, 30 September 2008 (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 STP-districts 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 02:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox STP-districts (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox Settlement}}. Used only once. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:23, 28 September 2008 (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:Censored 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 section.

The result of the debate was userfy. I assume the 'delete' folks are ok with userfication since the arguments were based more around 'pointless' than 'actually harmful'. delldot ∇. 01:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wikipedia is not censored. Template used for censorship. ░▒▓Frogger3140▓▒░ (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not necessarily for censorship, but pointless nonetheless.
Delete or move to talk/userspace. Which is the only places this is currently used (or should be). — jdorje (talk) 18:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose Speedy close as userfy. I would do this myself, but I no longer have the tools to clean up the redirects. Physchim62 (talk) 11:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think there are any redirects. This is rather low-use, and I can't see how anyone would put up a redirect. Hence, if no one objects, I support SPEEDY USERFY and will probably do it tomorrow. 64.136.26.230 (talk) 22:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC) (Oh, sorry, User:Gnorthup)[reply]
    • I meant the redirect that I would create when moving it to userspace, which is normally deleted immediately afterwards, no? Physchim62 (talk) 11:03, 30 September 2008 (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 Holby City character 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 01:29, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Holby City character (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox character}}. Used by 4 articles, in which I converted the infobox to Infobox character. The list of minor characters of the series was already using the Infobox character. Right now it's orphan as well.-- Magioladitis (talk) 09:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC) Magioladitis (talk) 09:05, 28 September 2008 (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:Hurricane main 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 section.

The result of the debate was redirect to {{main}}. delldot ∇. 02:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hurricane main (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template was created solely for the purpose of duplicating the {{main}} template for one set of articles (Hurricanes) and putting the article text in bold, which breaches WP:MOSBOLD, creating a bolded main subarticle against the manual of style. It provides no functionality beyond what the {{main}} template does, and exists solely to create a bolding on hurricane articles at variance with WP:MOS. Recently, an IP has been edit warring to reinstate the bolding, so it's time to remove the template. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to main template. Delete. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment/Question: Why not just redirect this to template:main instead of deleting it and save the work of having to manually change a bunch of sections in a lot of articles? Doing this is a lot would be a lot less work (although a bot could do the fixes). Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 03:51, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • We did that, it didn't seem to work (unclear, I don't speak templates), but the IP removed it, twice, which prompted me to come to TfD for a decision. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure why redirecting doesn't work (AFAIK it should, as other templates seem to work fine with redirects [maybe the linked parameter is causing the problem? I'll have to ask someone good with templates for assistance]; Maybe the VP?). Redirecting to main remains my first choice. If this somehow is impossible, then delete is my second choice. The best bot for changing the template links from hurricane main to main (if there isn't already a bot that removes/changes template links for deleted/replaced templates) is the one that changes the links to renamed categories from the old, newly redlinked name, to the new proper one (Don't remember the name at the time). Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 04:31, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to main works for me if someone can be sure it's working, and we need a clear decision since others were reverting. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)so it Keep because if we don't it would lead to problems to the revision history.[reply]

Keep Plesse

Redirect to main.--Leave Message orYellow Evan home 04:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow Evan Home (who restored the bolding twice before the IP did) has entered duplicate declarations here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect it. The template has outlived its usefulness, but a redirect would be less disruptive. If the IP reverts, revert it, and request protection if that reversion trend continues. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:31, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Considering the edit-warring that has been going on, redirect and protect would be a better option at this point. Failing that, delete. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep it. It is not a duplicate of {{main}} because it is far simpler. Do away with the bolding, but keep this one because it will always work with the unique format of the project's articles. Since the other one is widely used, it will always need to be tested to see if it encroaches on WTCP templates if someone decides to make changes. The simpler one is far more desirable.Potapych (talk) 06:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Guys.... can we remove that stupid template saying its about to be deleted as it looks bads. Itfc+canes=me (talk) 12:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to {{main}}, as the template violates WP:MOSBOLD, and just looks plain messy. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 12:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The MOS issue should be a separate issue. {{main}} has been significantly revised many times since its creation, so I think it would be better for the stability of WTCP articles to have a separate one. Since this template is usually placed right next to the other templates, it really shouldn't force any formatting on the rest of the section. The other features of {{main}} are rarely used by this project.Potapych (talk) 13:58, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How? MOS applies to everything, not just one template. Also, {{main}} is protected, so it can't be that unstable. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You can easily remove bolding, so MOS isn't an issue. Since it is protected,you have to find someone who is familiar with the templates and has access to fix it.Potapych (talk) 18:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't understand. We have removed the bolding, but it's been re-added several times. There is nothing to fix at {{main}}, so again, I'm at a loss here. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

KeeepI love are template, but I do not konw how it would look like.--Leave Message orYellow Evan home 14:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete/redirect. Yeah, that's why it was created - before I made it, people were ignoring {{main}} and just writing in the text in order to get the bold effect they wanted. — jdorje (talk) 16:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add, once the bolding is removed this is a dup of {{main}}. Yes it's simpler as {{main}} is more flexible; that's not a reason to prefer the less useful template. In fact I'd rather just delete the whole thing and get editors to start using the right template, though a redirect would indeed be less disruptive as it's surely used many thousands of times. — jdorje (talk) 16:42, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking about the templates that conflict with the small infoboxes, which there are several. Even the deletion one was either going through the boxes or pushing them down earlier today, depending on the order the templates are placed on the pages. I think it is better to keep the same one, knowing that no one will try to upgrade it to something fancier sometime in the future, which could ruin the format on every season page.Potapych (talk) 17:09, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That would argue for a redirect. But if a global template conflicts with other templates, we should fix them, not just foist the problem off by using our own templates. — jdorje (talk) 17:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, no one's consulted anyone at WTCP before they made changes to some of the other global templates. I removed them from some of the articles because they overlapped the small infoboxes. I don't want to see this {{main}} adding linebreaks or overlapping the other templates because someone changed something. It's acceptable in most articles, but the simpler version serves a purpose in others.Potapych (talk) 18:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect; there's no reason to have a separate template. --NE2 20:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There's no reason to have the redirect. However, that means all of the links would have to be removed, but I'm sure we have bots that can do that. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:17, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My bot can do all of the replacements if we need, but a redirect solves the problem with only one edit. Plasticup T/C 00:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't do that. If it's redirected, it can at least be fixed with a simple revert if something else changes. There's nothing to be gained from switching everything over, and use of the current name should probably continue.Potapych (talk) 04:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot imagine what change would encourage Hurricane articles to deviate from the rest of the encyclopedia, but I agree that a redirect is the best option. Plasticup T/C 05:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Get rid of the template would ruing to history of the page and this would iinval nearly a thousand edits. Leave Message orYellow Evan home 16:34, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note. This user already commented above, with a vote to keep. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about? The template has a grand total of 23 edits, as shown in the history link above. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 22:20, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think he means it will take hundreds of edits to replace {{hurricane main}} with {{main}} on the articles the template is used on. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:08, 4 October 2008 (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 Korean Metropolitan cities 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot ∇. 01:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Korean Metropolitan cities (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

DELETE. This template is only used on a few pages and doesn't offer anything that Infoobx Settlement doesn't already. In fact, the infobox settlement template gives the ability to add much more information. See the diffs here & here. Sorry we need less niche templates like this and more standardisation of current infoboxes. Roxi2 (talk) 03:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wizardman 01:12, 28 September 2008 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_September_28&oldid=1146661552"