Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 April 23

< April 22	April 24 >

April 23 edit

Template:Pro lacrosse team 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 discussion was Delete --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 09:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pro lacrosse team (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template that is redundant to {{NLL Team Infobox}} and {{MLL Team Infobox}} Yarnalgo _{talk to me} 23:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - in theory, this could be a useful template, as there presumably must be lacrosse teams that don't play in the NLL or MLL. However, the fact that it isn't currently used suggests otherwise. I wouldn't mind this template existing if there was an actual need for it, but it seems there isn't at the moment. Robofish (talk) 03:30, 26 April 2009 (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:MLBManager 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 discussion was Delete. Wknight94 ^talk 01:57, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per discussion at WT:MLB, the information in this template has been selectively merged into {{MLB managers by team}}. This template has no further use. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. -Djsasso (talk) 18:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.--Yarnalgo _{talk to me} 00:09, 26 April 2009 (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:Shellshock Series 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 discussion was Delete. Wknight94 ^talk 01:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Shellshock Series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Contains only two entries. A template is unnecessary. SkyWalker (talk) 15:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. —Ms2ger (talk) 17:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Robofish (talk) 03:27, 26 April 2009 (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:Albannach 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 discussion was keep --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 05:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is nothing to navigate with this template. The band only has 3 albums and 1 video. Currently there are only articles for the band and one album (2 total). Template is useless. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 11:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. —Ms2ger (talk) 17:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update - I've created the other articles and updated the template so we can see what it looks like with more than one entry.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 02:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it it workable enough to keep now...added instruments. Is it acceptable to withdraw nomination for deletion?
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 17:39, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. In response to the above, no, you can't withdraw the nomination for deletion, as someone else has already supported it; however, I agree that the template is acceptable now more links have been added. (I don't think the links to instruments are necessary, but even with just the band, the albums and the video it links five articles - generally enough for a navigational template.) Robofish (talk) 03:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Is it supposed to be a navigation template? Also it is completely unnecessary to have links to their instruments. Locos ~ epraix Beaste~praix 22:21, 26 April 2009 (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:Qif 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 discussion was Kept as historical, already marked as deprecated. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 08:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

This template, when transcluded, inserts a message stating that it is deprecated. The only transclusions are on user sandboxes. There are, however, numerous links to the template page. Deprecated since 2006. — This, that, and the other [talk] 09:56, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for historical evidence. —Ms2ger (talk) 17:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
recurse _→AzaToth 20:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What is this? — This, that, and the other [talk] 22:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I believe he meant to type "recuse" as in he is the creator of the template and won't comment on its TFD. –xeno ^talk 21:44, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - It could also have been a bit of programmer's humor. --Dinoguy1000 (talk · contribs) as 66.116.12.126 (talk) 23:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A little off topic but why don't you just sign in Dinoguy? --Yarnalgo _{talk to me} 23:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Cuz I'm lazy and this computer sucks. =) --Dinoguy1000 (talk · contribs) as 66.116.12.126 (talk) 01:50, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

keep Referenced in too much disscussion to make removeing it practical.Geni 20:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - If it is obsolete, why to keep it? I think that almost every no deleted template kept for historical reference is useless. Locos ~ epraix Beaste~praix 22:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP very good source code and in many discussions! 174.112.211.185 (talk) 23:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for historical reference. --Yarnalgo _{talk to me} 06:10, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - historical reference? why should that be done? Locos ~ epraix Beaste~praix 17:51, 2 May 2009 (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:Ifndef 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 discussion was Delete --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 08:52, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redundant. The code is {{{2{{{1|}}}|}}}, which is redundant to {{#if:{{{1|}}}||{{{2}}}}}. Orphaned. — This, that, and the other [talk] 09:52, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's been orphaned now. —Ms2ger (talk) 17:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ifdef and Ifndef are included in Wikipedia's Help instructions, someone should fix that. 76.66.196.218 (talk) 00:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Good sourcecode, in many discussions, why delete historical stuff that shows interesteing things with WikiSyntax? 174.112.211.185 (talk) 23:41, 30 April 2009 (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.