Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 May 13

May 13

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 no consensus to delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:51, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No longer free access. It appears one needs to register / pay. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete that's a real pity, this was a straightforward and cleanly written link for many anatomy articles. A pity to see it behind a paywall, but we are not here to offer advertisements to other websites, especially profit driven --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but stop using in the ==External links== section. The rationale sounds like a good reason to stop using it in ==External links==, but I don't see any reason here to explain why we should delete it. Deleting it will break all previous uses on talk pages, as refs, in old revisions, etc. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:57, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 00:17, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:29, 13 May 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).
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) 18:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable band does not seem to warrant its own template. UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:15, 13 May 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).
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) 18:46, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

single-use template Frietjes (talk) 12:23, 13 May 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).
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) 18:45, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

not needed for connecting two songs, redundant to the navbox Frietjes (talk) 12:22, 13 May 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).
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) 18:59, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient navigation -- only two entries. The rest have been redirected to alphabetical lists for lack of notability. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:51, 13 May 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).
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 June 7. Primefac (talk) 15:18, 7 June 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).