Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 September 22



Template:Coordinate

 * 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. I'm not making a redirect but if folks want to do it that's fine. If someone would like to userfy this, contact me and I'm happy to undelete it for that purpose. delldot  &nabla;.  22:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Redundant to coord (and to coord missing). Recent discussion at WT:GEO decided by consensus that coord is the preferred coordinates template. coordinate's documentation states "Currently not implemented.". Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep it facilitates integration of content from Wikipedia's in other languages. Pages using the template can be converted periodically to the current standard template or wh*atever new templates are made up in the meantime (e.g. coord missing). -- User:Docu
 * Delete (or perhaps redirect to coord) as unused and redundant to other templates. Adambro (talk) 19:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Since it's currently deprecated, it's not going to get used, so it doesn't serve any purpose to keep it. Coordinate is a step too far, too soon, before we've even cleaned up the existing mess of at least twelve different geocoordinate templates: as far as the en: Wikipedia is concerned, it's an example of second system syndrome. One day, in a year or two, we may want something like it, but it's more likely to be implemented by progressive evolution of coord, without a need for a whole new syntax. coord is a kludge; but at least it's a single and currently-used kludge that is moderately well implemented and understood by our data reusers (notably Google), which can be used as a bottleneck for resolving problems as we evolve the system, without having a flag day. -- The Anome (talk) 19:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * If one doesn't want to do the conversions from coordinate to coord by bot, one could modify it to output a properly formatted coord when used in article namespace, e.g. would output 46.54861°N, 7.98306°W . -- User:Docu
 * Note: Please note that the above, although not marked as merely a comment, nor nested under another's, is 's second post here and should not be counted again. (Since kindly refactored by EncMstr) Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete or Move to user space: Coordinate has some positive attributes like its brother is heavily used on DEwiki, and it accepts an elevation parameter.  Disadvantages include that it takes more typing to use, and its heavier resource usage limits it to about 420 instances per article (as in an article listing coordinates), is not supported by Google Maps and Google Earth, formatting control seems less flexible, though the last could be my misunderstanding and/or poor documentation.  The disadvantages greatly predominate.  However, if development of coordinate addresses these, it should be fairly easy to migrate to it sometime down the road. —EncMstr (talk) 20:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. One day we might migrate to something more parameterized (but that might well still be called coord), but until the day we've solved all the existing multi-templates problems, we shouldn't encourage any further template proliferation. -- The Anome (talk) 20:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * If this is deleted, it should be redirected. --NE2 20:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * why, and to what? Firstly, this template is not currently used in any article, removing any need for compatibility, and secondly, such a redirect would in any case be useless unless it's redirected to a template which implements the exact same interface, which creates a circular problem by taking us back to the original reason for deletion. The correct solution is to migrate any extant examples to supported templates. -- The Anome (talk) 22:48, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * To coord as a reasonable alternate name for someone who forgot the exact name. --NE2 00:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete or userfy; I do not see the need for another coordinate template standard now. Don't redirect. There are several parties parsing Wikipedia for coordinates; we want to make that as simple as possible. -- Eugène van der Pijll (talk) 07:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per The Anome. Redundant to the superior coord. Occuli (talk) 12:22, 27 September 2008 (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 section.

Template:Cyndi Lauper singles

 * 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 section.

The result of the debate was orphan, but keeping the template as a redirect to keep page history from merge. delldot  &nabla;.  23:12, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Merged with Template:Cyndi Lauper, no need for two templates covering the same sets of materials. Wildhartlivie (talk) 13:26, 22 September 2008 (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 section.

Template:KeptDRV

 * 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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. delldot  &nabla;.  21:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Unused; creator blocked as an abusive role account. Stifle (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed typo in the nomination. Stifle (talk) 08:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - we have delrev for cases where we want to temporary retain the content or page history of an article for the duration of a deletion review. –Black Falcon (Talk) 16:18, 23 September 2008 (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 section.