Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 January 25

< Wikipedia:Templates for discussion‎ | Log
< January 24 January 26 >

January 25 edit

Template:2008 PIHA Atlantic Division standings 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:39, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused templates. Any pages that once used these templates have been deleted via WP:AFD. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:01, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, and possibly speed delete per WP:CSD#G8. Frietjes (talk) 15:09, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. I don't see this as valid template content. This is just bad, unreferenced, article content lurking in the template space. Even if I am mistaken in that belief it is clearly not good template content and nobody needs it for use in their articles hence their lack of use. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:46, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: All per nom and rationale above. GauchoDude (talk) 18:59, 27 January 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:SLBC and Template:SLBD 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) 02:32, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The SLBC template is un-used and unlikely to be used in the future. This was only made to cover about 7 pages (like this one) (ever) and the headings on those pages use a different headings now that match other similar (AD) lists, (like this one).tahc chat 21:31, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The SLBD template is un-used and unlikely to be used in the future. This was only made for lists that are now merged into other "by century " lists. tahc chat 21:31, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete both, since they are not needed. Frietjes (talk) 15:08, 26 January 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:Crunchyroll 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 speedy delete per G7. Primefac (talk) 13:47, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to warrant a navbox Rob Sinden (talk) 09:24, 25 January 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:Prototype 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) 02:30, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are only two articles in the Prototype series—a navbox is overkill czar 05:40, 25 January 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:2016-17 Sports event AfDs 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 3 Primefac (talk) 00:30, 3 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:Infobox World Equestrian Games country 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:51, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:20, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:10, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Montanabw This template is in regards to xxx at the x equestrian competition. Those do not exist and therefore its unnecessary to have this template. Also others have been merged into {{Infobox country at games}}. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:44, 25 January 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:RSWMX 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:39, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've phased this template out of its former use on Mexico radio station templates. Radio Station World was used to build the original templates. However, it has become inaccurate over the years due to AM-FM migration and the assignment of dozens of new noncommercial stations. The lists in the current set of Mexico radio templates are built from the IFT tables. Raymie (t • c) 03:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:07, 25 January 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:RugbyUnionAt1920SummerOlympics 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. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:38, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template is unused. Rugby union at the 1920 Summer Olympics uses a standard Infobox template instead. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 07:55, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Slight complication -- it turns out that this is one of a series of related templates. Where there are multiple events such as Template:FencingAt1920SummerOlympics, these function as navboxes. Where there's only one event, however, they're redundant, eg Template:FieldHockeyAt1920SummerOlympics (note "Football"). I've pinged Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Olympics. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 08:19, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: In theory these could/should contain links to separate articles listing squads, qualification etc. in addition to the event links (e.g. Template:Rugby sevens at the 2016 Summer Olympics). However, given that only two teams were involved and that even if there was a qualification system (I doubt it) we wouldn't easily find enough details for a separate article then it can probably all be included in the main article and I don't see a need for the unused template. There may be a few other examples that fall into this category, like the hockey one above, kicking about as well - Basement12 (T.C) 16:38, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:06, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, unused, but allow for recreation if more event articles are written. Frietjes (talk) 15:14, 26 January 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_January_25&oldid=1138373689"