Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 February 26

< February 25	February 27 >

February 26 edit

Template:I See Stars 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:43, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:I See Stars (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not enough content for a template. Why do so many users think that EVERY FREAKING BAND needs a template even with only two or three articles? Are templates just that cool or something? Come on. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 23:15, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is not useful for navigation. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:36, 28 February 2010 (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:California County Route TUO 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route TUO (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route TUL 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:47, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route TUL (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route STA 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route STA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route SLO 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:50, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route SLO (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone G. Rs chen 7754 22:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Single item nav template. No longer needed due to item being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route SJ 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route SJ (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route SBT 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route SBT (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J or California County Routes in zone E. Rs chen 7754 22:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into lists. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route SAC 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route SAC (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J or California County Routes in zone E. Rs chen 7754 22:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into lists. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route MPA 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route MPA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route MON 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route MON (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone G. Rs chen 7754 22:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route MER 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route MER (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route LA 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route LA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone N. Rs chen 7754 22:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route INY 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route INY (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:47, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Single item nav template. No longer needed due to item being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route FRE 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. RL0919 (talk) 04:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route FRE (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:47, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Single item nav template. No longer needed due to item being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route DN 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. RL0919 (talk) 04:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route DN (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

None of these articles exist, and if they did they should be merged to California County Routes in zone D. Rs chen 7754 22:47, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Nav template not used on any articles and populated with red links. Items in template should be in a list when created, similar to other California county routes. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route CC 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. RL0919 (talk) 04:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route CC (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Single item nav template. No longer needed due to item being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route CAL 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. RL0919 (talk) 04:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route CAL (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J or California County Routes in zone E. Rs chen 7754 22:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into lists. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:California County Route ALA 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. RL0919 (talk) 04:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:California County Route ALA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All links redirect to California County Routes in zone J. Rs chen 7754 22:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — no longer needed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No longer needed due to items being consolidated into a list. --LJ (talk) 02:03, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per above. ---Dough 48 72 17:06, 27 February 2010 (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:Jeff Wadlow 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jeff Wadlow (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not enough articles to justify a navigational template. Robofish (talk) 03:22, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Scott Frank 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:16, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Scott Frank (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates one film. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This one deserves a special mention, as one of the least useful navigational templates I've seen in a long while. Robofish (talk) 03:23, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Peter Sollett 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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Peter Sollett (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not enough articles to justify a navigational template. Robofish (talk) 03:22, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Oren Rudavsky 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) 22:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Oren Rudavsky (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep-- So? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 19:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So... it's not useful for navigation. What is the point in a template that navigates two articles? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not enough articles to justify a navigational template. Robofish (talk) 03:22, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough articles to justify a navbox. Looks like he has some other films that might be notable, so it should be fine to recreate the navbox in the future if/when there are enough articles (at least four; five or more would be best to avoid another TFD nomination). --RL0919 (talk) 23:46, 2 March 2010 (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:Bennett Miller 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) 22:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Bennett Miller (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not enough articles to justify a navigational template. Robofish (talk) 03:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Jonathan Levine 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) 22:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jonathan Levine (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not enough articles to justify a navigational template. Robofish (talk) 03:21, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Fraser Clarke Heston 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) 22:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fraser Clarke Heston (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three films and most recent was 15 years ago. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Ethan Hawke 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) 22:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ethan Hawke (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Can find no other films directed by him (though there is a play and a music video). Two articles (three including the Ethan Hawk article) isn't enough for a navbox, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 12:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Ed Harris 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) 22:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ed Harris (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not enough articles to justify a navigational template. Robofish (talk) 03:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Sandi Simcha DuBowski 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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sandi Simcha DuBowski Films (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films (one of them as producer.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not enough articles to justify a navigational template. Robofish (talk) 03:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Daniel Barnz 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) 22:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Daniel Barnz (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not enough articles to justify a navigational template. Robofish (talk) 03:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Brian Herzlinger 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) 22:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Brian Herzlinger (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two films —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - not enough articles to justify a navigational template. Robofish (talk) 03:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough links for a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 18:41, 5 March 2010 (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:Tooltip 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 {{Tooltip}} to {{Abbr}}. There is no evidence of a desire to delete these beyond the nominator, but also no doubt of a huge overlap in the function of the two templates. That said, the use of hover text in articles is deprecated in Wikipedia:Accessibility, so I am going to add a caution in the template documentation to remind users of the accessibility issue. RL0919 (talk) 18:08, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tooltip (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Abbr (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I noticed this template while searching an article for the subject′s native Japanese name, which I intended to copy and paste into another medium. However, somebody had moved this info to a hidden dimension known as tool-tip. I had no problem finding the tool-tips in question (once I knew what was up, by checking the page history) but I noticed the font-size for these floaters does not follow that of normal text, and as such they are a grave impediment to reading Kanji.

More to my immediate despair I was unable to select it using the cursor on the article page, only by going to the editing window. Yet suppose I had a physical disability, or had been reading from printed copy, or navigating by keyboard only (with my lappy perhaps) or using a web-browser which does not support tool-tips?

Also see Wikipedia:Accessibility, in particular “Don't use techniques that require physical action to provide information, such as tooltips or any other "hover" text”.

I′ll ask for a consensus to delete this template on general principle. Failing that I demand we restrict its use to common short words of Basic Latin and minimize the adverse practical impact of it. ―AoV² 15:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/Merge to {{abbr}}. The title attribute is standards complainant and accessible HTML4/5 attribute. Screen reading will read this aloud sometimes. If you have trouble reading the text, adjust the font size in Display Properties in Windows' control panel. — Dispenser 18:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of points:

I didn′t say anything about HTML standards compliance, or about screen-readers, or MS Windows so I don′t think your rebuttals are terribly germane. Let me re-iterate:

The “tool-tip” provides no way to select the floater-contents using the cursor. From the reader′s perspective, this is nearly as problematic as using bit-map images in place of “foreign” text.

More generally if the reader doesn′t have a mouse handy he or she wouldn′t be able to hover the cursor over the hidden message.

Even assuming a mouse the information is still inaccessible if one doesn′t know where to look.

I did figure out how to increase the tool-tip size on my screen but it′s not a viable solution as doing so will enlarge everything regardless of character set, plus it does nothing for other readers.

Could we possibly ensure that “tool-tip” information is always available in plain sight elsewhere on the page?

―AoV² 19:15, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, since you mentioned HTML standards, this is what I was able to find:

Some graphical user agents will display a tool tip when the mouse hovers above a form field containing a title attribute. However, current user agents do not provide access to the title attribute content [when browsing] via the keyboard.
The tool tip in some common user agents disappears after a short period of time (approximately 5 seconds). This can cause difficulty accessing title attribute content for those users who can use a mouse but have fine motor skill impairment, and may result in difficulties for users who need more time to read the tool tip.
It is difficult for most users to resize, adjust background colors, reposition or otherwise control the presentation of title attribute content in many current user agents.

[…]

Note: Current user agents and assistive technologies do not always provide the information contained in the title attribute to users. Avoid using this technique in isolation until the title attribute has wide-spread support.

Source: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H89.html

―AoV² 19:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To address a few of your points:

Not being able to select the text is a limitation of your browser, it could be fixed with an extension to add "copy title attribute" option when right clicking.
The reader is informed of its presents with a dotted underline and a help cursor when moving over it.
You can define the font and size separate from other text, In winxp: Control panel → Display Properties → Appearance → Advanced → Item: Tooltip. You should also not assume the limitation of your browser (not being able to select the text) to apply universally

Please note, that <abbr> element is used on the history page for the minor and bot flags, so there's some precedents. Looking at the backlinks there are some abuses. So I suggest we change the wording in the documentation so it's clear that it's meant for abbreviation and to use notes for explanation. An example of the former is using No. in table headings where space is limited, but to use Gender^{[note 1]} when giving an explanation. — Dispenser 08:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What extension did you have in mind? Do you plan to write it? Did I say which browser I was using? Well, it′s “Firefox 3.7a2pre” at the moment, should anyone care.

Indeed I wouldn′t object so strongly to this gimmick in cases where the information:

(a) is available in plain sight elsewhere on the page, and/or:

(b) is something trivial which the average person will already know (e.g. that “no.” means “number” or anything else listed as WP:ABBR#Widely used abbreviations in Wikipedia).

However I have not seen such straight-forward use of this template in actual articles. Rather they more frequently employ tool-tip-space to hide matters of serious content such as original proper names (pre-anglicization), and IPA pronunciation data, and image captions. ―AoV² 09:57, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the tooltip template can be reformulated to also generate a "ref group=tooltip" which can be used as a footnote on the page. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 06:46, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you explain what that means exactly? Thanks. ―AoV² 01:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sure, look at Template:Tooltip/testcases and Template:Tooltip/sandbox. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 14:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Note, I just moved these to the “template” (non-talk) namespace. That′s fine, though I wonder if some of the data would be important enough to included in the main ref-list group. Better still, is there an easy way to list all extant foot-notes regardless of the group to which they belong? That is, if we do change the template as proposed, could we avoid having to add an extra ref-list manually to each affected article? ―AoV² 06:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Well, there is no standard groupname for footnotes other than references (default groupname), and these aren't supposed to be references. I've seen "note", "nb", "foot", "footnote", "fn" used as groupnames in various articles... And they should be kept separate from references... The documentation page mw:Extension:Cite/Cite.php does not indicate a way to generate all groups at the same time, nor does Template:Reflist. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 05:49, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Yes, but listing these foot-notes mistakenly in the main ref-list (until somebody adds a separate one) still would be preferable to not listing them at all. ―AoV² 13:05, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Well, just testing it, cite.php will generate an error message saying that you're missing the references tag for the group, so this shouldn't be a problem, since there'll be that missing refs message on a page if you forget to add the reflist/references tag. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 04:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to {{abbr}}. The {{tooltip}} template is simply a bad way to implement {{abbr}}. Let's keep {{abbr}} and redirect {{tooltip}} to it. I see no real need for a fancy "ref group=tooltip" approach. Eubulides (talk) 07:06, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- While I agree we don′t need or want two templates serving the same purpose, the purpose of the latter proposal is to address the accessibility problems inherent to any content which appears and disappears based on mouse position. ―AoV² 07:29, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think "abbr" is a good name, since you can use it for things other than abbreviations. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 05:49, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - The template name is named directly as how the html attribute it produces is called which imho is the best name for it, although redirects are apparently cheap so we can point other things to it. Peachey88 ^{(Talk Page · Contribs)} 07:20, 2 March 2010 (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.