Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2009 November 14

< November 13	November 15 >

November 14 edit

Template:Network Ten summer primetime 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) 05:29, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Network Ten summer primetime (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template appears to be from the summer season 3+ years ago. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 13:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not useful anyway, even if it were to be updated. — This, that, and the other [talk] 09:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, not useful. GlassCobra 01:21, 17 November 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:Tracy Gable films 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. Wizardman 03:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tracy Gable films (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Clark Gable and Spencer Tracy made a grand total of three films together. Does that really need a template? Clarityfiend (talk) 04:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing in the articles indicates any significance to the pairing. If we start creating templates for every intersection of stars, then we're back to the "actor filmography template" problem that has been discussed at length recently. Those discussions have repeatedly shown a consensus against such filmogrpahy templates. Even if this intersection is somehow notable, the nom is correct in pointing out that there aren't enough articles to justify a navbox. --RL0919 (talk) 16:01, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. per nom. --Klein zach 23:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. GlassCobra 01:20, 17 November 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.