Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 August 3

< August 2	August 4 >

August 3 edit

Template:Brenda Song 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) 04:42, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Brenda Song (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

As per consensus for actor navboxes. See MOS:FILM#Navigation. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 17:57, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is a consensus against having actor templates because, if they were allowed, most film articles might wind up with dozens of them. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:49, 7 August 2011 (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:Shin Koyamada 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) 04:43, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Shin Koyamada (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

As per consensus for actor navboxes. See MOS:FILM#Navigation. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 17:56, 3 August 2011 (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:Chris Rock 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 as a "discography" template Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:18, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chris Rock (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

As per consensus for actor navboxes. See MOS:FILM#Navigation. Rob Sinden (talk) 13:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per MOS:FILM#Navigation. Also not Rock has currently got two director credits, but as per MOS:FILM#Navigation, this is not enough to justify having a template. If he directs more films (god forbid that ever happens), then happy to support a director only nav box. Lugnuts (talk) 12:05, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep after rewrite. I agree with MOS:FILM, but the many of these links are for comedy albums. So, cut everything after the first line, and keep. Possibly rename to {{Chris Rock comedy}} or {{Chris Rock albums}} to make it clear that the scope of this template does not include movies in which he starred. 76.199.7.31 (talk) 15:00, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JPG-GR (talk) 16:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the IP; this is proper as a discography navbox, but needs to be shorn of the acting credits. oknazevad (talk) 03:35, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the IP and oknazevad .--Yu-Fan 宇帆 (talk) 02:16, 6 August 2011 (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:Mexico U-17 squad - Peru2005 (1th Title) 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) 04:45, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mexico U-17 squad - Peru2005 (1th Title) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

It is a youth tournament, I nominated a similar template a while ago and got deleted. GoPurple 'n Gold₂₄ 03:59, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be kept because it's an international tournament that was won. Kido477 16:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JPG-GR (talk) 16:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, just being a member of a U-17 squad is not significant enough of a criteria to justify a navigation box. Plus, what is the 1th title? Seem's redundant since the date is in there as well. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 18:00, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. IMO, even for championship teams (and important once at that), such templates are just clutter. Teammates in any given year or tournament are no more or less notable than teammates in another year or tournament. The only thing of value in these templates is that the player was part of a winning team, which should obviously be noted in the article body. Reso lute 14:54, 5 August 2011 (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:Non-free promotion 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) 04:47, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Non-free promotion (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Someone's personal offshoot of Template:Non-free promotional. Fully depreciated. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:07, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with nominator. Completely redundant and unused. Sir Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 07:47, 3 August 2011 (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:Foster the People 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) 04:47, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Foster the People (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three directly relevant articles (and the record label.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:03, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No need until they have some more substantial releases to make a navbox useful. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 21:25, 10 August 2011 (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.