Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 January 6

< January 5	January 7 >

January 6 edit

Template:Notleaks 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 as no longer useful Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 16:14, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mea culpa! this is the second time that I close a TfD of the wrong date! I'm not expecting anything drastic to happen between now and tomorrow, but if anyone would like to keep this open, let me know, and I'll immediately self-revert and relist. I'll go find a trout now. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 16:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is a generic response meant for people who think that Wikipedia is Wikilinks and accordingly complain or praise us for things they've done. Since Wikileaks isn't much at all in the news anymore, I don't see why we'd need to continue using it; note that it's a talk page message, so all uses should be substed, and deleting it won't break them. As far as I can tell, it hasn't ever been heavily used; it links to an essay, and WhatLinksHere for the essay shows essentially nothing from the past 2½ years. We can still write a generic message if someone comes around thinking that we're Wikileaks, but it's not at all likely to happen unless they get in the news again, and we can always undelete this template should that happen. Nyttend (talk) 23:17, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No longer useful. As above, Wikileaks is rarely discussed anymore and I haven't seen a post where this would have been relevant to place in response in a long time. Since I am the creator, I suppose G7 might be shoehorned in, even though others contributed, or this can run its course.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:20, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above; no one seems to be making this confusion anymore. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:41, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete Frietjes (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2015 (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:User Sandbox 1 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. User created a sandbox in template space by mistake. The template has been blanked and the content is now at Draft:Robert M. Rogers. EdJohnston (talk) 03:26, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Sandbox 1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Article not a template. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:42, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete DB-TEST, test edit outside of the proper sandbox areas -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 02:55, 8 January 2015 (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:Ops 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) 00:26, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems to be a simple copypastable text string, Why does this need a template? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:38, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion going on at the moment on WPMILHIST about how to format names of operations. I created this template as part of that discussion and for further development. It is possibly similar to the ship templates in in how it could eventually work or that discussion could decide that we don't need the template at all in which case I would request speedy deletion myself. BTW it is not a simple cut and paste. BoonDock (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy if wanted, otherwise delete. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:58, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete Frietjes (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
delete as unused other than in the creators sandbox, with no objection to userfication for testing and subst: purposes, and to facilitate discussion. Also no objection to recreation as a subst: only template if that's deemed useful in the mentioned formatting discussion. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:43, 14 January 2015 (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.