Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 January 30

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion | Log
< January 29 January 31 >

January 30

edit

Template:C418

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 04:30, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox exclusively consists of redirects/redlinks (not watching this page, so ping me if you need me) czar 16:54, 30 January 2016 (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).

Template:Miss Universe Denmark

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 04:33, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation template with nothing left to navigate. Aside from the main pageant article, everything has been deleted or redirected. • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 30 January 2016 (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).

Template:Weatherbox Rio Branco, Acre

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).

The result of the discussion was relist to Feb 7. Primefac (talk) 04:45, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

merged with Rio Branco, Acre, so no longer needed (could move to article space and redirect if we need to preserve attribution). Frietjes (talk) 14:20, 30 January 2016 (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).

La Liga and PFA teams of the Year

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).

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 04:39, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The point of a navigation box is that it assumes the user is likely to want to get from one article in the box to another. For an actual team, this is likely. However, in this list, while someone interested in one person on the list is also likely to be interested in the others, it does not follow that a user reading an article on one person who did well in 2015 is likely to want to view the page on another player, who may well have played for an entirely different team. That's before we even get into the WP:TOOMUCH argument. No need of all these.. making a junk GreenCricketTALK 14:13, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Qed237 (talk) 15:35, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep: I can't see why these templates deserve to be deleted, to be honest. They represent an award, just like any other (goalscorer award, best manager award). It's like a Team of the Season award resumed. If some people doen't want to view another player who did well in 2015, they won't. That's not a valid point. MYS77 ✉ 14:44, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Qed237: I see. Isn't this a case of WP:GRAPES, then? MYS77 ✉ 03:37, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@MYS77: A very short essay that I would not read to much into, but I guess you can see it that way. Qed237 (talk) 12:52, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Dirtlawyer1: I think you missunderstood these awards, they are individual awards were they make an XI of the best goalkeeper, the best right-back and so on. The players in the templates are from different teams. Qed237 (talk) 14:12, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Qed237: So these awards are, in effect, "all-league" honors for a given year? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:15, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Dirtlawyer1: Not sure what you mean with "all-league", but yes. After each season the league picks out the best players for each position for that season and calls it "team of the year" and it is an honour to be given that award. Qed237 (talk) 14:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Players from the whole league can be choosen. Qed237 (talk) 14:23, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did misunderstand: this is what we would call "all-league" or "all-star" team, the equivalent of All-NBA for pro basketball, All-Star for Major League Baseball, All-Pro for the National Football League, or All-America for college sports. Scratching my comment and !vote. I said nothing. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:32, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_January_30&oldid=1142562460"