Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 June 22

< June 21	June 23 >

June 22 edit

Template:Germany U21 Squad Euro 2009 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) 01:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Germany U21 Squad Euro 2009 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per previous discussion, there is no need to create template for youth tournament . Matthew_hk t c 20:02, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:15, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom; previous discussions have concluded that youth templates for football tournaments are NOT notable. Giant Snowman 20:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and prior consensus. Jogurney (talk) 12:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and previous consensus on the matter. --Angelo (talk) 09:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - We have articles for Under 21 national teams because the players at the under 21 level tend to be notable unlike other youth national teams. Also, as a side note, the announcers who covered the Germany/Italy semi-final did call the UEFA U-21 European Championship a "major tournament". Kingjeff (talk) 05:34, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per nom. Garion96 (talk) 08:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't think there's any need for anything other than senior templates. Although in this case I agree with them, previous discussions and consensuses should be looked at but not automatically deemed correct or progress will never be made. slυмgυм [ ←→ ] 17:16, 29 June 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:GDPL 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) 06:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Used on two files, where it can be subst'ed. Why is this shell for another license template needed? –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:39, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and delete per nom as there is no need to hide one template in another before transcluding into a file page. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 02:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - completely redundant with {{self|xx}}, subst? Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 23:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 09:44, 29 June 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:Dsemayaimg 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) 06:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

License template used on only one file. No real need for it; it can be subst'd on that one file. Creator (and, by extension, the uploader of any images that this would apply to) hasn't been very active since 2006 (just 7 edits in '07 and '08 combined, none so far this year). –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:29, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This template consists of a tranclusion of {{GFDL-with-disclaimers}} and a personalized version of {{GFDL-self}}. The page title suggests that it was intended for use by the template's creator only. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 02:31, 23 June 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:Copyright holder Mutters mueller 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) 06:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Copyright holder Mutters mueller (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template used on only one file (which I've nominated for deletion as lacking a source), which is more or less entirely redundant to {{GFDL-self}} –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This template consists of nothing more than a tranclusion of {{GFDL-self}} and the page title suggests to me that it was intended for use by the template's creator only. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 02:30, 23 June 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.