Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 February 6

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< February 5 February 7 >

February 6 edit

Template:FIBA-Europe roster header 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 relisted on 2017 February 15. Primefac (talk) 19:38, 15 February 2017 (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:EuroBasket 2015 Spain team roster 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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 19:38, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

merged with EuroBasket 2015 squads, so no longer needed Frietjes (talk) 19:22, 6 February 2017 (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:Czech Republic Squad EuroBasket Women 2015 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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Primefac (talk) 19:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

merged with EuroBasket Women 2015 squads, so no longer needed Frietjes (talk) 19:18, 6 February 2017 (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:Oldham Athletic A.F.C. matches 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. Primefac (talk) 18:44, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No navigational benefit, as only one Oldham match has an article. Potentially useful in future if they appear in any cup finals or other notable fixtures, but not at present. As a separate navbox exists for Oldham Athletic topics generally, a link to the 1990 match can be included there instead. Jellyman (talk) 16:03, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. No navigational benefit, per nom. --Rob Sinden (talk) 16:04, 6 February 2017 (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:Live-action remakes of Disney animated features 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. Primefac (talk) 18:44, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are enough Disney film navigation boxes already. This one fails points 3-5 at WP:NAVBOX, as it does not have an article on the subject of the navbox, and they do not refer to each other to a significant extent. Rob Sinden (talk) 14:33, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Along with the policy reason given by Robsinden this template attracts all manner of entries that show a lack of understanding of what a remake is. The most absurd was the editor who added any film with the same title including silent films for the early days of cinema. MarnetteD|Talk 17:40, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I think it should be deleted. There's no need to know about how many live action remakes of Disney animated feature films. BattleshipMan (talk) 06:21, 9 February 2017 (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:Rudo municipality 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. Primefac (talk) 18:41, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template used just once, to give you navigation option between just two blue links. In this way, superfluous. The Banner talk 22:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The template was created in the same way like [this one]. The idea was to encourage other editors to create additional settlement pages, and update the template accordingly. For that reason alone I would leave it. --My-wiki-photos (talk) 23:48, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 13:24, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not enough links to provide useful navigation. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:31, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. As regards the idea that it might encourage editors to create articles for the redlinks — the template has existed for five months, so its not really doing that either. Jellyman (talk) 18:02, 7 February 2017 (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:Furry comics 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 relisted on 2017 February 16. Primefac (talk) 00:22, 16 February 2017 (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:Freeways in the Twin Cities 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. Primefac (talk) 18:41, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Better suited by a category. Also see past Valdosta precedent, since confirmed here, here, here, and here, here, and here, and here. Rschen7754 01:03, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete—per precedent and all of my past comments in the related nominations. Imzadi 1979 → 14:31, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Per past precedent. Dough4872 16:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per precedent. (especially Phoenix, as that's even larger than the MSP MSA) — Train2104 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 8 February 2017 (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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2017_February_6&oldid=1087817577"