Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 December 6

< December 5	December 7 >

December 6 edit

Template:Short 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; deleted by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 04:03, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Short Films (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused article fragment. Frietjes (talk) 23:24, 6 December 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:Roller coasters at Islands of Adventure 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 delldot ∇. 03:10, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Roller coasters at Islands of Adventure (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Superseded and replaced by Template:Roller coasters at Universal Orlando Resort. Has already been removed from all linked articles. ihafez ^talk 17:07, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:14, 6 December 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:Roller coasters at Universal Studios Florida 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. delldot ∇. 03:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Roller coasters at Universal Studios Florida (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Superseded and replaced by Template:Roller coasters at Universal Orlando Resort. Has already been removed from all linked articles. ihafez ^talk 17:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:14, 6 December 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:Aztec Hall Of Fame Inductees 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 delldot ∇. 02:53, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Aztec Hall Of Fame Inductees (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No main article that it is supposed to link to (there should be a HOF article, not the general school sports article), 90%+ of the inductees don't have articles (100s of them), and seems cruft-y. Jrcla2 (talk) 15:10, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Please note that the creator of this navbox has already had 2 San Diego-related HOF navboxes deleted. Jrcla2 (talk) 15:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Questionable notability with no associated article. Issues with too many entries that dont have navigation links and poor overall organization has been outstanding on its talk page since August 2011.—Bagumba (talk) 01:14, 7 December 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:Indonesia Super U-21 League coaches, 2010–2011 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 delldot ∇. 02:45, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indonesia Super U-21 League coaches, 2010–2011 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Full of redlinks so serves no purpose, plus conventions at WP:FOOTY are against templates just for one specific year such as this. Giant Snowman 13:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 13:36, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 18:19, 11 December 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:Classic Folkmmanis 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 delete WP:CSD#G3 hoax. JohnCD (talk) 21:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Classic Folkmmanis (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Classic Folkmanis -- Patchy1 11:38, 6 December 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:Classic Folkmanis 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 delete WP:CSD#G3 hoax. JohnCD (talk) 21:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Classic Folkmanis (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Classic Folkmanis -- Patchy1 11:38, 6 December 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:ITimeSheet 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; deleted as G2 by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:03, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

appears to be a cut-and-paste copy of {{infobox}}. Frietjes (talk) 00:48, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. It is also unused and there is no indication of how to use it. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:33, 6 December 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:ISO 639 name Serbian 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, nothing to merge. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:00, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ISO 639 name Serbian (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:ISO 639 name Italian (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and not valid ISO 639 names (that would be Template:ISO 639 name sr and Template:ISO 639 name it) Frietjes (talk) 00:41, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the two templates as they perform the same function. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:16, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- there is nothing to merge, since they are duplicates, and the nominated templates are not valid ISO 639 codes (see the category). Frietjes (talk) 23:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, they are duplicates, so the nominated templates should be merged into the two templates you named in your nom to eliminate the confusion. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 11:28, 7 December 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:Blogger, Template:Facebook, Template:Flickr, Template:Google+, Template:IMDb, Template:NNDB, Template:Tumblr, Template:Twitter and Template:YouTube 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 templates relisted on 10 December 2012. Frietjes (talk) 18:02, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Template:Google+ (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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

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

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

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

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

Same reason. --76.232.68.248 (talk) 00:33, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would suggest splitting this nomination. There is a big difference between having external links to a person's Facebook page, Twitter account, etc. in an article about a person and a link to Tv.com. The closest analogy for Tv.com would be IMDb. NNDB is somewhat similar, but the rest of these are really not that similar to Tv.com, so you should provide a better reason for those. Frietjes (talk) 00:43, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is at best ill-researched and at worst bad faith. WP:EL does not prohibit linking to user-generated content, but simply advises caution. Many of these are extremely broadly-deployed and used appropriately. It's not really worth our time to pick through them individually based on an inappropriate mass-nom: if the IP wants to give these another go individually then it is free to do so by itself once it's actually read WP:EL. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 05:21, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Chris Cunningham. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:41, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Chris Cunningham. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on procedural grounds; these templates are used in substantially different manners, and it's not at all a good idea to try to vote on all of them at the same time on substantive grounds. If you come back and nominate them individually, it will be quite different. Nyttend (talk) 18:13, 8 December 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.