Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 May 28

< May 27	May 29 >

May 28 edit

Template:Chess position Inverse 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) 00:27, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chess position Inverse (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

redundant to |reverse= with {{chess diagram}}. Frietjes (talk) 22:31, 28 May 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:Chess diagram/letters 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) 00:27, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chess diagram/letters (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Chess diagram/row (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Chess diagram/square (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused after updates to parent template. Frietjes (talk) 17:23, 28 May 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:CFF player 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) 00:27, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CFF player (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

there is no use for this template since CFF changed their website at the end of 2012. Oleola (talk) 12:39, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete uses as external links, and replace uses as references with appropriate archived links. I updated the template to send you to an archived page as a temporary fix, since the CFF links were broken. Frietjes (talk) 15:29, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 00:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - what do you mean "there is no use" - has the CFF website simply changed URLs (in which case we should fix the template) or have they removed the information entirely? GiantSnowman 08:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I wasn't able to find a new page with the information. for example, here is the archived page and here is a google site search which only returns word documents and pdf files. the front page for the website has no search box. Frietjes (talk) 21:27, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The website was redesigned months ago and unfortunately it seems the information was removed entirely. Timbouctou (talk) 23:30, 30 May 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:Unanswered 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 redirect. If the redirect is inappropriate, please nominate it at WP:RFD. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:17, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is one actual transclusion of this template and it has been sitting there unanswered for four years. I believe this template has been superseded by {{Help me}} and is no longer needed. Technical 13 (talk) 14:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion, however is it worth actually answering it?--Laun chba ller 14:52, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The number of transclusions does not help judge how often this template is used. Someone answering may remove the tag (most likely, I suppose) or convert it to a link.[1] Also, it is primarily intended to be used on article/project talk pages whereas {{Help me}} is for user talk pages. See Wikipedia:Template messages/Talk namespace. If there is evidence that it is not used and there is a preferable alternative, get rid of it. Otherwise, let sleeping dogs lie. Thincat (talk) 17:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So for future reference, what is the correct template to use for a userspace draft i.e. Give It Up (The Good Men song) (previously located at User:Launchballer/Give It Up)?--Laun chba ller 18:16, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply I think you did exactly right. However, after it was in mainspace, if you had then asked a question on the talk page, I don't know. Usually you just hope someone answers! If then there is no answer or an unsatisfactory one, I suppose Template:Unanswered is suitable. Thincat (talk) 18:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say, I've never seen it used anywhere. What would you think about using that as a 'master' request template and having helpme and other request templates, such as Template:Editprotected, sister off it? Like Category:Candidates for speedy deletion, for example. We could have them all feed into Category:Requests with sister categories "Help requests", "Unanswered requests", "Semi-protected edit requests" and "Edit requests".--Laun chba ller 18:56, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting idea. Not entirely opposed to it if it is structured correctly. {{Help me}}, {{Admin help}}, {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit semiprotected}}, and hopefully {{3O}} would need inclusion at least. Technical 13 (talk) 19:09, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So where would I go about proposing this? Just a simple post on WP:AN either linking to this or a wholly separate thread?--Laun chba ller 19:51, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I see no evidence that this was ever widely used. Even if it was at one point, it's not supported anymore, and {{help me}} does a far better job. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:33, 22 May 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, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:05, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to {{help me}}. Frietjes (talk) 15:29, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Ten Pound Hammer. — Train2104 (talk • contribs) 00:03, 2 June 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.