Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 August 16



Template:GameFAQs

 * 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The result of the discussion was speedy keep per SNOW and withdrawn TFD. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 04:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Taking this discussion to TFD for a wider opinion. Is Wikipedia in the business of providing links to WP:GAMEGUIDE content? I believe it isn't, but another editor wisely pointed out that including the link might deter random editors from adding their own game guide content. Is that reason enough to keep the template? Axem Titanium (talk) 19:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. This really isn't the best forum for such a discussion, since it is about clarification of the WP:EL guidelines and not really a request to delete the templates. I could understand proposing deletion if you firmly believe the template would encourage violations of the guidelines, but not just to raise a discussion. I recommend taking your question to the talk page for the external links guidelines. If there is a consensus that links to these sites are never appropriate, then bring the templates to TfD. --RL0919 (talk) 19:34, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep both – I would say that, as long as the content doesn't run afoul of being game guide material (that is, mirrors what you would normally see in GameFAQs or StrategyWiki aside from the front pages on the StrategyWiki articles), I do not see why they cannot be included as I don't see such external links violating WP:ELNO. Futhermore, with GameFAQs, it's not just walkthroughs and cheats, they also provide release data and a brief overview of ratings in which GameSpot uses. MuZemike 06:15, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - The benefits of keeping external links to GameFAQs and StrategyWiki outweigh any potential negative effects. They can supplement the material provided by Wikipedia if the reader is interested in further reading, and it's always nice to have opinions other than just Wikipedia readily available. :) King Arthur6687 (talk) 04:46, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Gamefaqs helps provide useful information about many titles. I think it's something we should keep. It can sometimes help in gathering information for the wiki page itself. As stated before release dates and other data is displayed there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathwiki (talk • contribs) 04:41, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Templates provide useful information, and keep those who want to add gamecruft from being tempted. Templates also direct users to GameFaqs forums for gaming questions, FAQs, and codes keeping the article and its talk page free of clutter.  Truthfully I don't see why this went to TfD. --Teancum (talk) 11:28, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I see no possible reasons why getting rid would be beneficial. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.147.85.250 (talk) 10:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - The templates are useful as they are. Removing the templates will encourage unstandardized individual links to GameFAQs.  --  stillnotelf   is invisible  14:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Withdraw TFD per WP:SNOW, ok, you guys convinced me. It'd be nice if there was a bit more uniform application of the template then, though. Cheers, Axem Titanium (talk) 21:25, 21 August 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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Cirrhosis essentials

 * 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 discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 00:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)



Unused and inappropriate use of template space. Apparently related to WikiProject Haystacks which no longer exists. PC78 (talk) 16:10, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. A template intended to transclude a section of regular content into the body of articles. Bad idea. --RL0919 (talk) 16:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * FWIW, this doesn't appear to be the usual (mis)application of a template to insert content into an article, but rather a relic of a project to provide parallel information for "people with limited time or mobile users". Still, said project was abandoned and this template is unlikely to fill any other purpose; delete. Maralia (talk) 16:02, 18 August 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 template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.