Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 March 8



March 8, 2006

 * 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).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Template:Lunar crater
Replaced by new templates Lunar crater data and Lunar crater data image. All instances have been replaced. RJH 22:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Unused and redundant. Chairman S.  Talk  01:07, 10 March 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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * 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).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Templates related to Portal India featured-content
These templates were created for part of a queueing system to be transcluded onto Portal:India. The system was erroneously named, and has been renamed to selected articles. The featured article pages have been deleted per the consensus at Miscellany for deletion/Portal India featured-content fork, it makes sense to delete the templates too. Hiding talk 21:53, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * All templates have no germane incoming links.
 * Delete per nom.  Pagra shtak  23:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Pepsidrinka 03:53, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Ter e nce Ong 15:11, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom --Khoikhoi 04:25, 12 March 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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * 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).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:53, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Template:Association of Independent Technological Universities
No longer used in any articles; was superceded with a category. —BorgHunter ubx (talk) 19:19, 8 March 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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * 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).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. As bogdan mentioned below, it makes no sense to just remove the self-reference because it just essentially makes this template a redundant link to a category. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Template:Metalworking - Mini
Mentioning the word "WikiProject" in an article is a self-reference. bogdan 14:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep The problem isn't the existence of the template, it's how it's being used. Templates like this are common, but belong on the talk page.  Pagra shtak  23:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete The existence of metalworking renders this useless.  Pagra shtak  23:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Pagrashtak  G i zza Chat  &#169; 07:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Pagrashtak--Bookandcoffee 19:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Remove self-reference to wiki project and keep. Useful navigational template, which is different than a Wikiproject notification template. Luigizanasi 20:20, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Remove self-reference and keep If the problem is really just the self-reference then we'll remove that word, as we did for the other templates, after we were appropriately notified on the wikiproject talk page. The point of this template was to provide an unobtrusive navigational aid to other metalworking related articles, without stamping any claim on the article. It was therefore to be used on edge articles, those with multiple claimants such as ruler, marking gauge. &mdash; Graibeard(talk) 20:54, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If we remove that, it only remains "This article is part of Category: .", which makes no sense, this is not the way we use the categories. bogdan 21:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Pagrashtak. Simply putting the article into the category should be enough. Flowerparty ■ 20:54, 11 March 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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * 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).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete all Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Oscar templates
These templates take up much too much space on the article page when the info could easily be included within the text (and thus take up a lot less space). If such templates are really necessary, they need to be better designed. Perhaps there would be some way of merging them with the Oscar succession boxes? Arniep 01:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep: It's helpful and it gives people Awards Info much more faster then just reading the text. It's visually appealing.--Jack Cox 01:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I note you created it. Arniep 02:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete: Nice idea, but I think it should be much much smaller and take up more horizontal room than precious vertical. LOL at above. Tertiary7 02:05, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: It needs to be way smaller, where the user can see the vertical catergories without having to scroll all the way up again. I STRONGLY disagree that it's visually appealing, sorry! Tigermave 02:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: Joaquin Phoenix's article is messed up because of it. StargateX1 03:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Spacing is a problem. Many of the pages that get these already have other tables and pictures. Makes things cramp and sometimes blocks text. Crumbsucker 04:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I find lists such as Helen Hunt easier to read than these templates. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment agree that format needs improving. Seems to be rarely used though, big oscar winners like Jack Nicholson (12 nominations),  Laurence Olivier (10 nominations), Ben-Hur (1959 film) (12 nominations) don't use it. -- Oscar The Cat talk [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px]] 13:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Nicholson's page had one, but it was removed. Meryl Streep and Steven Spielberg's pages have them. Crumbsucker 13:30, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I used this template in some articles already so I'd vote for keep but the design should be improved. --Tone 14:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - it messes up pages, and the info works better in text or table form anyway. exolon 19:11, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Can we possibly not delete this and find a way to make it look better?--Jack Cox 21:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep: I find the template to be useful and informative. It is used on multiple pages (including that of Joaquin Phoenix).  While its format could be improved, I don't see that as a reason to delete it entirely. --Hetar 08:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see why this information could not be shown in a normal table which would not stick out like a sore thumb on the page. If there is a way of making this template resemble a standard table that might make it acceptable. Arniep 15:32, 9 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. the template's information can be presented within a few lines of text with an article. --Madchester 16:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - I would prefer we try and re-edit it, is there any ideas one of you has in mind?--Jack Cox 23:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above --Khoikhoi 05:42, 12 March 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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


 * 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).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:34, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Template:Nantes infobox
Only used on Nantes article (and only likely to be). Template should be subst'd and deleted. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 19:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom --Khoikhoi 04:22, 12 March 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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.