Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Ed Poor + or minus pages


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the discussion was speedy delete per author. bd2412 T 20:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Ed Poor/+ 0
Large number of duplicative code fragments, unedited for approx 2 1/2 years. Many are for the use of depreciated template:switch -- HrafnTalkStalk 15:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC) Part of a collection of approximately 300 (generally very old) subpages in Special:PrefixIndex/User:Ed_Poor/, in need of pruning per WP:WEBHOST. HrafnTalkStalk 15:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Ed Poor/+ 1
 * User:Ed Poor/+ 2
 * User:Ed Poor/+ 3
 * User:Ed Poor/+ 4
 * User:Ed Poor/+ 5
 * User:Ed Poor/+ 6
 * User:Ed Poor/+ 7
 * User:Ed Poor/+ 8
 * User:Ed Poor/+ 9
 * User:Ed Poor/minus1
 * User:Ed Poor/minus10
 * User:Ed Poor/minus11
 * User:Ed Poor/minus12
 * User:Ed Poor/minus13
 * User:Ed Poor/minus14
 * User:Ed Poor/minus15
 * User:Ed Poor/minus2
 * User:Ed Poor/minus3
 * User:Ed Poor/minus4
 * User:Ed Poor/minus5
 * User:Ed Poor/minus6
 * User:Ed Poor/minus7
 * User:Ed Poor/minus8
 * User:Ed Poor/minus9


 * Delete as having no utility assuming the description above is accurate. This does not mean, however, that "utility" in itself is viewed by me as essential for articles in userspace. Collect (talk) 15:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. bd2412  T 18:05, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Czolgolz (talk) 23:31, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above, useless. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. makes this sort of ugly hackery unnecessary, anyway. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 02:03, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Alas, I must concur. His seniority can only get him so far. flaminglawyerc 06:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per author I don't know what all the personal remarks are about, but I always intended to delete these myself. I'm a bit wistful about seeing them go, because it was due to these templates and others like them that Tim Starling felt impelled to create the parser functions that power my age template. This is just about the most widely used template in Wikipedia, a fact I'm very proud of. (I'm not exactly proud of my seniority; that and three bucks will get me a cup of coffee at Starbucks. ;-) --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:58, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.