Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 July 1

< June 30	July 2 >

July 1 edit

Template:GNH 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) 16:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not used, wrongly categorized Si Trew (talk) 19:23, 1 July 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:First 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) 16:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

This template presumably is intended to link to an episode of the Muppets on wikia.com. However it is not actually used anywhere except on one template talk page and one user page, neither of which I believe in the correct context. The name is too general (should be muppets-wikia-episode or something) but considering it's not used anyway, might as well be deleted. Si Trew (talk) 14:16, 1 July 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:Left66 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) 16:56, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Left66 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Practically identical to Template:Left60, which was deleted. Basically a giant, unnecessarily complicated template that outputs "<div style=width:66%;>" that is no longer used at all. Axem Titanium (talk) 10:35, 1 July 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:DivineAdoratrice 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 per T3 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Similar to Template:GodsWife, this is hard-coded succession box with little usage. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:52, 1 July 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:Skal vi danse? 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) 16:58, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Skal vi danse? (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navigation template for basically one season (mostly red links) Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:24, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete—This is unwarranted and much consolidation of what's blue is in order, not making the red ones blue. And someone could loose an eye if the redink account gets back in there. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:21, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to delete the template because I want to keep it and I want the template to be colorful. If the template is deleted I would create the template again. _―Œ^(talk) if you don't want to delete the template please give me a message on my talk page; I don't have a user page. Thanks!!! Dungcamed2010 (talk) 18:26, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This evidently isn't required at this time, what with only three of the links being blue. We don't need navboxes for every single subject, and they aren't baubles to be coloured in as the author pleases anyway. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 07:48, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Damn, I already opined on this one; looks closable as del, at this point ;) Jack Merridew 20:10, 8 July 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:Infobox patriarch styles 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) 16:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox patriarch styles (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to the generic {{Infobox manner of address}}. It was only being used in about 5 articles, so I replaced it. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:23, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as redundant and appropriately orphaned. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:21, 1 July 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.