Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2009 December 12

< December 11	December 13 >

December 12 edit

Template:Infobox area code 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 redirect to Template:Area code box. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:34, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox area code (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphaned template Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:48, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. Unused, and although the template is not formally deprecated, its own documentation suggests that editors use {{Area code box}} instead. However, since editors might search for the template under an "Infobox ..." naming scheme, the redirect would be useful. --RL0919 (talk) 19:56, 17 December 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.

Various auxiliary Interstate templates 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 _―Œ^(talk) 18:02, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:I-H-1 aux (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:I-24 aux (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:I-25 aux (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:I-72 aux (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:I-82 aux (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:I-84 (west) aux (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I am nominating these six templates for deletion because they all include only one page on it, see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2009 December 4#Template:I-83 aux as precedence. ---Dough 48 72 16:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. Navboxes without enough links to make a navbox helpful. --RL0919 (talk) 17:13, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per Template:I-83 aux. --Fredddie ™ 19:38, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All, per rationale for Template:I-83 aux. --LJ (talk) 01:19, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all as underpopulated navboxes. Also consider adding {{I-66 aux}} to the list. 81.111.114.131 (talk) 03:05, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on the condition that the navboxes are replaced with the appropriate links (such as a link to H-201 on H-1 and a link to H-1 on H-201 and so forth) necessary for navigation. – T M F 16:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you make sure these links were missing before suggesting this? 81.111.114.131 (talk) 19:48, 17 December 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:Addrow 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) 20:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Orphaned template which appears to be used to wedge rows into infoboxes. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unused and apparently abandoned, with no talk, no links and no edits since 2007. --RL0919 (talk) 17:15, 12 December 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:ICGHS 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 after merging the contents with the parent article Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

An AfD discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XXVIth International Congress of Genealogical and Heraldic Sciences, established that consensus was to merge articles on the individual meetings listed in this template to the organization. Once these merges are complete there will be no need for the template. Abductive (reasoning) 15:26, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All the links redirect back to the same article, so there is no navigation in this navbox. --RL0919 (talk) 15:34, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the articles were redirected by Abductive with no attempt to merge the material. I have undone the redirects. No objection to merging them, but a redirect is not a merge. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:38, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete _after_ merging content Ok to delete the template, after the date, host, etc. information in each of the target articles is merged. Otherwise the information will be lost. — MrDolomite • Talk 22:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- If the edit summaries are accurate, the merges have now been performed in a more appropriate fashion. If anyone reviewing this discussion believes the merges were not properly completed, they should speak up. --RL0919 (talk) 19:53, 17 December 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.