Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 February 15

< February 14	February 16 >

February 15 edit

Template:Wests Tigers 2010 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) 01:09, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wests Tigers 2010 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Wests Tigers 2011 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Wests Tigers 2013 squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unneeded templates. Only being used in one article at most, and have now copied over the content to the relevant articles. J Mo 101 (talk) 13:59, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

merge with articles and delete. Frietjes (talk) 21:50, 17 February 2014 (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:Firefox release history english 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 after merging with History of Firefox. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Firefox release history english (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This Template is no longer used at all. Instead, the full table syntax is now copied into the Firefox Article. By the way, the whole point of Template:Version is to have only a single Template from which to write "Version history" tables. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 08:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Only used in one article, but you should have waited for the TfD to complete before copying the contents into the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 09:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Yeah, it was used in one article only, but it can be also used in History of Firefox article. Also, just as Walter Görlitz already noted, you should've waited for this AfD's resolution before manually transcluding the template. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 21:45, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for the premature transclusion. The point remains, however, that the much more soft-coded and flexible Template:Version (already used on increasingly many Articles) is supposed to be become the basis of all "Version history" or "Release history" tables in software Articles. That's why it was created. (Minus the color code for discontinued products, but even then, the rest of the format remains the same.) That Template can be used at Firefox history as well as Firefox after deleting this near-orphan Template. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 23:44, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, as we know everything is still there within the revisions history for us to manipulate it further as required. You're totally right that {{Version}} template should be used instead – how about keeping the {{Firefox release history english}} template and redoing it so the {{Version}} template is used? Does placing {{Firefox release history english}} template into the Firefox history article sound usable to you? Of course, it could be clearly seen as overlapping with the already available content in that article, but—on the other hand—it's much more detailed. Or, we might ditch the {{Firefox release history english}} template altogether, and just link the appropriate Firefox's section into Firefox history – for a possibly less confusing layout? Thoughts? — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 00:50, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Subst and delete into History of Firefox. This should not be in Firefox. It's much too detailed for the general article, filled with minutiae. A drastically smaller summary is all that's needed in Firefox -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 03:08, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into History of Firefox per IP —PC-XT+ 07:33, 16 February 2014 (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 Singapore 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 merge Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:56, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Universal Studios Singapore (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:Roller coasters at Universal Studios Singapore with Template:Universal Studios Singapore.
Per WP:NENAN. There are just four of these rides. The park template can just as easily take care of this. ...William 15:49, 30 January 2014 (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) 00:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge of Delete as not having enough relevant links to warrant a navigation template The Banner talk 01:16, 7 February 2014 (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) 03:17, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. (t) Josve05a (c) 00:11, 24 February 2014 (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.