Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 August 30

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< August 29 August 31 >

August 30 edit

Template:Faculties, schools, colleges and institutes of Naresuan University 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) 04:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Faculties, schools, colleges and institutes of Naresuan University (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

almost all redlinks. Frietjes (talk) 23:50, 30 August 2012 (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:India topics sidebar 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 no consensus Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:06, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:India topics sidebar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

We don't normally have country-topic sidebars. This template serves no purpose and is redundant to the already-existing Template:India topics. Mar4d (talk) 23:39, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep there's something massively wrong with that footerbar, it's gigantic, and therefore no longer viable as template. Index pages should not masquerade as a navbox template. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 13:44, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Size is not a great reason. If you think that the topics template is too large, one solution would be to split it into groups like how it has been done at Template:Pakistan topics. This sidebar is unneccessary and redundant. Mar4d (talk) 18:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fix - a useful navigation tool - but the color of the links are not what our policy allows. User accessibility should be the main concern over nice colored links. As per WP:COLOUR and Help:Link color = Links should clearly be identifiable as links to readers.Moxy (talk) 18:43, 31 August 2012 (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:WTFPL 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, the argument that it is rarely used outside of commons is compelling (since any image with this license would be moved to commons). Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:05, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Very rare and currently unused licence tag. It is highly unlikely that anybody will upload something with this licence. Bulwersator (talk) 22:21, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - Unless you want this template deleted at Commons as well it should remain. – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 04:43, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • What? Template on Commons is not nominated in this deletion request and this deletion will not cause anything like this Bulwersator (talk) 11:07, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please please please. We should absolutely not encourage editors to upload under nonstandard, whimsical licenses. Allen4names's comment is a red herring, as images uploaded at Commons use their own license templates and are unaffected by any deletion of our local copies. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:19, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I will clarify. If you delete this here you should also have this deleted at commons. Not everyone is going to upload thier work to Commons regardless of what anyone may want so why not let them use this licence? – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 04:07, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've already addressed why people should not be encouraged to use this license. I have no idea what you're on about regarding Commons: Commons is a different project with different rules and we can't make them delete templates. However, there are no WTFPL-licensed images on Wikipedia at the moment and it should stay that way. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:49, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Why? There are multiple licence tags that are only on enwiki or only on Commmons Bulwersator (talk) 10:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep if somebody wants to release their work under this license, let them. I, for one, release almost all of my software under this. It's accepted by the FSF, so why not allow it? Frood! Ohai What did I break now? 21:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Because licence proliferation, especially when the only point is to introduce whimsy and vulgarity into the commons, is a bad idea. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 23:18, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see no point in creating licence tags for all possible licences Bulwersator (talk) 23:27, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, any image uploaded with this license should have been uploaded to commons instead, since the image is eligible to be moved to commons. we do keep more standard commons-compatible license templates here, but no reason to keep this one. just having it on commons is enough in this case. Frietjes (talk) 17:42, 8 September 2012 (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:CvSU-CAS 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) 04:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CvSU-CAS (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

NENAN. 198.102.153.1 (talk) 21:48, 30 August 2012 (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:LetterCombination 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) 04:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused frontend. Frietjes (talk) 20:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unused (and unuseful). -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:50, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: only function is to create unwanted clutter on dab pages. PamD 18:03, 3 September 2012 (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:ListCheck 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) 04:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

replaced by {{y}}/{{n}}/{{qmark}}. Frietjes (talk) 20:40, 30 August 2012 (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:Spacebar 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) 04:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

old and unused. Frietjes (talk) 20:36, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment is this supposed to be a softbreak? -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 04:57, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete seems a good candidate for deletion, unused, little to no point, et cetera AJ Kirwin (talk) 05:13, 31 August 2012 (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:Preprint 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, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused outside of a discussion on one talk page. Frietjes (talk) 20:35, 30 August 2012 (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:Invalidtitle 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) 04:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

old, unused, and can be replaced by {{voidd|{{invalidtitle}}}} even after this template is deleted, since the "whatlinkshere" feature will still work even if this template is deleted. Frietjes (talk) 20:25, 30 August 2012 (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:IfIsWP 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) 04:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

old and unused. Frietjes (talk) 20:20, 30 August 2012 (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:Inclusionist-cleanup 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) 04:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Inclusionist-cleanup (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

old and unused. Frietjes (talk) 20:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment it looks like a substitution template -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 05:19, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Projectspace, say WP:WikiProject Inclusion/inclusionist-cleanup -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 05:25, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bad faith garbage boilerplate, and it reflects poorly on 76.65.128.252 that he would propose keeping this. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 23:23, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • My opinion on what happens to the template has no relation to my opinion on the statement contained within the template. But since you asked. I think the template's statement wouldn't hold up in any discussion it was used in. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 09:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfunny, no potential use Bulwersator (talk) 23:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete This was created back in 2005 by Kmweber, a noted (and thankfully now retired) opponent of deletion who would constantly disrupt Wikipedia to spread his "include everything" beliefs. He apparently intended to always transclude this onto AFDs but doesn't seem to have done so, instead opting to spam AFDs with "Speedy keep, it clearly exists, nothing else matters" (even though not once but at least twice, he did it to something that turned out to be a hoax). Given the editor's history, it's clear that this template was made only for the sake of disruption. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:40, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Per TenPoundHammer. Substitution of this template is not a valid !vote and it hasn't been used in the last 7 years. jonkerz ♠talk 08:42, 3 September 2012 (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:Substemplate2 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) 04:37, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Substemplate2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

old and unused. Frietjes (talk) 20:05, 30 August 2012 (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:Filmography-vg 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) 04:37, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Filmography-vg (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

old and unused, could userfy. Frietjes (talk) 19:53, 30 August 2012 (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:EstCfindyear 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 userfy, can be moved back to template space if it is actually needed in the future. Let me know if you want any help with developing a less expensive method for doing the same thing. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:58, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:EstCfindyear (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:EstCfindname (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Year to decade (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

looks like this was never deployed, could be userfied? Frietjes (talk) 19:24, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or you might simply allow me more time to develop a new template for all categories of the "YYYY establishments in COUNTRY"? It remains on my todo list. __meco (talk) 11:16, 31 August 2012 (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:Rfl 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, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

per this discussion, a different solution was found. Frietjes (talk) 19:21, 30 August 2012 (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 Twitter account 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 speedy deleted by Skier Dude Frietjes (talk) 20:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Twitter account (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No twitter account is ever likely to be notable enough to warrant its own article, without the owner of that twitter account also being notable enough. Also, completely unused. Nikthestoned 16:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Utterly useless, and recklessly created by self-praiseworthy user who believes that Twitter accounts are valuable enough to benefit as stand-alone encyclopedic articles. --George Ho (talk) 17:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and recklessly created by self-praiseworthy user"? I advise you watch your tone. The fact that it is no longer used in any articles is good enough for its deletion; nobody needs or wants your commentary. Statυs (talk) 18:51, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • As the creator of the template, I !vote in favor of deleting the template. It simply doesn't have any use anymore. Statυs (talk) 18:51, 30 August 2012 (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:Major Highways of Conover 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) 04:46, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Major Highways of Conover (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template by definition can only be used on one article Conover, North Carolina and duplicates information already in article. Additionally, info in article has no redlinks, unlike template, and article has numerous navboxes already. Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:25, 30 August 2012 (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 Qajar Shah 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) 21:17, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Qajar Shah (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

It is redundant to {{infobox monarch}}, and pointless to have a dedicated template for the seven Qajar monarchs that doesn't offer any difference other than the Lion-and-sun in the top. Constantine ✍ 06:41, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, but maybe we should add monarchy symbol image to the infobox monarch so a person can add a symbol of the monarchy itself. Ego White Tray (talk) 03:50, 31 August 2012 (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:Degrassi: The Next Generation Timeline 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, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Degrassi: The Next Generation Timeline (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single use template (List of Degrassi: The Next Generation characters), if that is what it is for, it is written like a short article. 117Avenue (talk) 04:59, 30 August 2012 (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:The Blaster Series 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) 21:12, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Blaster Series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

WP:NENAN, links only 4 articles. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:33, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose if anyone is bothered to create articles covering the other games, this template may earn it's keep. Deltasim (talk) 05:06, 30 August 2012 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_August_30&oldid=1083551153"