Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 August 4

< August 3	August 5 >

August 4 edit

Template:Doctorwhoserialnav 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 per CSD#T3. Plastikspork (talk) 23:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Old, unused and orphan. We have now plenty navboxes for Doctor Who. Magioladitis (talk) 22:23, 4 August 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:Infobox shopping mall 2 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 as unused and redundant. Plastikspork (talk) 23:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox shopping mall 2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. redundant to {{Infobox shopping mall}} Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:16, 4 August 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:Baen DOI 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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:24, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Baen DOI (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is a "boilerplate" template used for repeated pasting of text into 1632 series articles. It's currently unused in article space after being subst and deleted from the few articles which used it. Plastikspork (talk) 21:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete though it is not the article, the title should be an article page. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 00:50, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's another namespace's concern. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:08, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy it — homestretch, folks. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:08, 5 August 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:TNTZ episode details 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. JPG-GR (talk) 05:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TNTZ episode details (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphan, unused for 2 years and inappropriate. It only adds text to articles. Check also Template talk:TNTZ episode details . Magioladitis (talk) 21:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating this one:

Template:TTW episode details (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Delete per nom. Plastikspork (talk) 19:01, 6 August 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:Interwiki doc page pattern 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. JPG-GR (talk) 05:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Interwiki doc page pattern (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Apparently this is to aid the creation of doc pages by giving a "simple" procedure ... of fifteen steps. It seems this could be made much simpler by copying and pasting from a help page. JIMp_talk·cont 19:41, 4 August 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:Cosmic Era vehicles and aircraft 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 Plastikspork (talk) 23:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cosmic Era vehicles and aircraft (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Transcluded on only one article that should be merged into main list. Only one entry in navbox. Farix (Talk) 18:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No need for one template for just one item. Kudos for those working on merging this mess. --KrebMarkt 20:12, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, too few articles to justify a separate navbox. I will adapt one of the other Gundam SEED navboxes into a singular, general navbox for the whole thing in a minute and redirect the rest to it. 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000} 18:06, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I lied... I simply created a new template and didn't redirect anything yet. ^_^;; If someone else cares to, please feel free. --Dinoguy1000 (talk · contribs) as 66.116.12.126 (talk) 02:31, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and ditto the kudos. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:28, 5 August 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:Super League Greece 2009-10 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 Plastikspork (talk) 15:34, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Super League Greece 2009-10 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is basically another copy of Template:Super League Greece teamlist. Single matchdays are not notable enough for an encyclopaedia. Soccer-holic^{I hear voices in my head...} 14:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Giant Snowman 15:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom; suitable template already exists. Giant Snowman 15:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and GiantSnowman. – Pee Jay 19:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - same thing as teamlist which is used only for the current season, what makes this template useless in 2010-11; plus the matchdays will be deleted, so no use in it. - SonjiCeli (talk) 12:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:51, 10 August 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:TTW episode details with image 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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TTW episode details with image (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Replaced with better one. Magioladitis (talk) 12:10, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Plastikspork (talk) 19:00, 6 August 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:Smallville Cast 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 merged into {{Smallville}}. JPG-GR (talk) 05:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Smallville Cast (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Inappropriate. We should not create navboxes between actors because they appeared in the same series. Magioladitis (talk) 12:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

here's another one: {{Pushing Daisies}}. check how it is used; on the actors' pages. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quite Inappropriate and too damn red. Delete. Cheers, Jack Merridew
Delete per nom (and my eyes are still burning from the colour). Plastikspork (talk) 18:59, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — now orphaned. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with {{Smallville}}. Notable actors in the show should be in the nav box. BOVINEBOY2008 15:05, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with {{Smallville}}. The list of actors should be merged with the {{Smallville}} template. --Carioca (talk) 21:37, 7 August 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:16chrm 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 speedy delete as orphaned and per recent discussions on the plentiful 1632-related templates. JPG-GR (talk) 17:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:16chrm (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

1632; inappropriate; I just orphaned it; none of the usages actually linked to any content. but they *did* link character names for Google to see. This has all been about promotion of franchise keywords on teh internets. delete Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:42, 4 August 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:BCA 2005 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 Magioladitis (talk) 16:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BCA 2005 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphaned unused template that is just a specified version of cite book. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Ricky. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; yes, it is orphaned. The current BCA rulebook is the 2008 edition, so this template would serve no purpose even if it were not orphaned. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 17:44, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Plastikspork (talk) 18:58, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --RL0919 (talk) 06:23, 8 August 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:1632 and similar 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 speedy delete as orphaned and per recent discussions on the plentiful 1632-related templates. JPG-GR (talk) 17:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1632 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:1633 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:35TCL (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:34TRR (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:34TGA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:35:TEF (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

another inappropriate 1632 template (ha, the eponymous one;). delete. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've merged a bunch of nominations here; all inappropriate. just use a link. delete. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:16, 4 August 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:R from 1632 redirect 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 speedy delete as orphaned and per recent discussions on the plentiful 1632-related templates. JPG-GR (talk) 17:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:R from 1632 redirect (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

inappropriate orphaned 1632 template; use one of the standard ones. Cheers, Jack Merridew 05:44, 4 August 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:Comma separated list 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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Comma separated list (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to, er, lists of things separated by commas. Doesn't appear to have ever been used on anything except List of Charmed characters (which is itself a morass of overused formatting templates), and I've hand-substituted those two usages with plain text. Templates like this serve only to make pages render more slowly and new editors become confused. Zetawoof_(ζ) 05:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as inappropriate; use a comma. Cheers, Jack Merridew
Delete. Unnecessary template. It's easier to just use commas. Jafeluv (talk) 14:41, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per noms. Plastikspork (talk) 18:57, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — Orphan (hint;) Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:24, 7 August 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:Bullist 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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Like Template:Comma separated list (above), this template manages to make a simple task complicated by wrapping it in a formatting template. It also grossly violates HTML formatting standards by using • and <br/> instead of <ul> and <li>. (Users of screen readers are likely to be inconvenienced by this sort of kludge.) As above: templates like this serve only to make pages render more slowly and new editors become confused. Zetawoof_(ζ) 05:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as inappropriate; use a bullet. Cheers, Jack Merridew
Delete. Using a template for this just complicates things. By the way, guess what I misread the template title as? Jafeluv (talk) 14:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A pithy description of template creep? :) Zetawoof_(ζ) 15:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom nom. Plastikspork (talk) 18:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Om nom nom nom? Zetawoof_(ζ) 04:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's the new mantra ;) Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:24, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — Orphan (hint;) Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:24, 7 August 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.