Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2009 November 24

< November 23	November 25 >

November 24 edit

Template:Buleleng Regency 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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Buleleng Regency (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Nothing but redlinks. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 06:16, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is okay to delete, if sometime future anybody wants to re-create the template, the equivalent in Indonesian wiki is Templat:Kabupaten Buleleng. Reindra (talk) 01:05, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it's being filled. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Berton (talk) 20:15, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No reliable sources for material being added. Orderinchaos 03:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Districts are notable. Starzynka (talk) 11:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It may have started with redlinks but it is all blue now. --RL0919 (talk) 17:35, 29 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:Pieces-style 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) 04:17, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pieces-style (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Incoherent information and ugly design. Maybe better to scrap it than spend time making sense of this? Klein zach 00:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Hodge podge of items, inculding red links, without apparent rationale for in-/exclusion. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are red links a reason for deletion? How is a rationale apparent in a template? Hyacinth (talk) 02:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The template is fairly old and was based on a template by someone else, meaning that its design is even older. Hyacinth (talk) 02:11, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Oh that horrible thing. Please delete it as it simply makes pages look awful - and it should really be about 1,000 times the size if it going to do justice to its subject (I assume no one wants that?!) --Jubilee♫clipman 02:18, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Just for fun I edited it: User:Jubileeclipman/Template:Pieces-style. I really hope no-one uses that! (Note a certain overlap with other templates I lifted from...) --Jubilee♫clipman 03:27, 27 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.