Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Infobox colours


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany 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 debate was Keep, tag as historical. Xoloz 16:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Infobox colours
This page was a try to create a Grand Unified Theory of Infobox Colors. But it has been around for a year and none of the indications given is followed. CG 19:23, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - Totally egregious deletion. I think it would be handy to have around as a reference, and I think it would be difficult to argue that it's deletable material. Given the various purposes, it might be good to have a page handy just in case. -ZeroTalk 19:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I recluse myself from this nomination. After referencing WP:INFOBOX, it appears this might be unnecessary.
 * I'm advocating a edit on the page to make it merely that of color reference; this might be suitible. This isn't a master list that requires the specific color to be used for a specific template, it seems. It appears to be more appropriate to sustain the page as a mere reference rather than a master list. -ZeroTalk 19:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, but if not followed, tag Historical. smurrayinch e  ster( User ), ( Talk ) 20:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral While it has its uses as a reference, it serves little purpose if it is not kept minimally up to date. And the unwatched multiplication of infoboxes doesn't make that task any easier. Circeus 20:17, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - I can't see any evidence that this was proposed anywhere. Failing that, mark it as rejected.  --Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 20:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but maybe with historical. Rossami (talk) 20:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, that seems thoughtful. Rack this up as a reference compliable with being permitted to look at later. This may not follow, but I'm not convinced this is deletion material. -ZeroTalk 21:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Surely to be historical it would have to have been used at some point? --Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 09:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. Many things with the historical and/or rejected tags were just good ideas that were tossed around for a time and ultimately were superseded by something else, were overrun by events, etc.  There's little harm in keeping a historical proposal and no real benefit to deleting it.  (Deletion does not, for example, actually free up any server space.)  Rossami (talk) 16:10, 14 June 2006 (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.