Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 December 18

< December 17	December 19 >

December 18 edit

Template:Lung size/activity 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 deletion. G6 — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 15:58, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lung size/activity (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Long depreciated template. Only contents are "The content of this template has been moved to List of terms of lung size and activity. See talk page for more info. Mikael Häggström (talk) 12:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)" Sven Manguard Wha? 19:54, 18 December 2013 (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:American Heritage 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) 14:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:American Heritage (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

WP:NENAN. Only links to two articles other than American Heritage itself. ...William 16:39, 18 December 2013 (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.

Airports in Norway 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. G5. Magioladitis (talk) 14:29, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Airports in Western Norway (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Airports in Eastern Norway (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Airports in Sothern Norway (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Airports in Northern Norway (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Those templates are redundant to the Template:Airports in Norway. The same author tried to make four different articles about Airports in Southern, Northern, Western and Eastern Norway, but those were speedied twice. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:01, 18 December 2013 (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:APBiology2009FA 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) 23:22, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:APBiology2009FA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Magioladitis (talk) 12:35, 18 December 2013 (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:Controversial (history) 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) 23:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Very few transclusions. I suggest that we replace with Template:Controversial. Moreover, we could add parameters to the latter similar to the ones we have to Template:Notability. Magioladitis (talk) 09:00, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I agree that we don't need multiple controversial templates. Rincewind42 (talk) 07:04, 23 December 2013 (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:Controversial (politics) 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) 23:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Controversial (politics) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Very few transclusions. I suggest that we replace with Template:Controversial. Moreover, we could add parameters to the latter similar to the ones we have to Template:Notability. Magioladitis (talk) 09:00, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I agree that we don't need multiple controversial templates. Rincewind42 (talk) 07:04, 23 December 2013 (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:Controversial (scientific) 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) 23:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Controversial (scientific) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only 1 transclusion. I suggest that we replace with Template:Controversial. Moreover, we could add parameters to the latter similar to the ones we have to Template:Notability. Magioladitis (talk) 09:00, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete Fine with me. I'm not even sure why I created this variant, seems to serve no purpose. Replacement is done. Paradoctor (talk) 09:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree that we don't need multiple controversial templates. As for the second point about changing parameters, best ask that on the template's talk page rather than here. Rincewind42 (talk) 07:04, 23 December 2013 (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:FC Arsenal Kyiv squad 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) 14:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FC Arsenal Kyiv squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Club defunct. Alex (talk) 01:48, 18 December 2013 (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:Grading/lk 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) 23:22, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Grading/lk (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

overkill for generating internal links, not widely used. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 18:24, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 00:31, 18 December 2013 (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:MD Rabbi Alam 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) 23:25, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MD Rabbi Alam (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Wrong namespace, should be moved to mainspace, userified or deleted. eh bien mon prince (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move or delete per nom —PC-XT+ 19:35, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
move or delete Frietjes (talk) 18:17, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We have real problems with this editor, eg they put a link to an AfD into an article as a reference.[1]. I'm thinking possibly ANI. Dougweller (talk) 16:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Offtopic Took him to ANI asking for a topic ban. Dougweller (talk) 20:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, moving to the article space would not make much sense as I am not sure that the subject meets notability. EricSerge (talk) 17:03, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 00:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not in the correct namespace. No use in the correct namespace. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:40, 18 December 2013 (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:Maker Studios 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) 23:26, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Maker Studios (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unlikely readers will need to navigate between these entries, it is better suited as a category and list. 117Avenue (talk) 01:31, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom —PC-XT+ 19:35, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 00:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, all links moved to appropriate Maker Studios subcats Vycl1994 (talk) 22:24, 20 December 2013 (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:A Great and Terrible Beauty 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 move Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:27, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:A Great and Terrible Beauty (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unnecessary template. Links "articles" that are almost entirely redirects to the lead article along with unrelated subjects. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 01:44, 17 November 2013 (UTC) Relisted 19:46, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With deletions and additions this could be converted to a Libba Bray navbox. Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:18, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose, but is there so much additional material that it would make such a navbox worthwhile? Based on her article I don't see a whole lot else and of course it's covered by links in that article as well. Jerry Pepsi (talk) 03:57, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

move to template:Libba Bray and refocus. Frietjes (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 00:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll support remaking into a Libba Bray template, which can be renominated if unsuccessful —PC-XT+ 18:05, 29 December 2013 (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.