Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 August 8



Template:Me

 * 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.

Orphaned, practically blank, not modified since March 2008 EmanWilm (talk) 20:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Another user tried to nominate this template but didn't finish. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 21:28, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Plastikspork (talk) 23:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I admit to being unclear on what this template is supposed to do, but it's obviously an orphan. Barring some defense of its usefulness, delete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RL0919 (talk • contribs)
 * 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.

More unit display templates

 * 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 per previous discussions and consensus. Magioladitis (talk) 15:56, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

These are the three remaining unit display templates. Like the others deleted before them, they not are used in the main space nor employed in any other useful fashion. They are all redundant to convert without anything close to 's functionality. They can all be deleted as the other unit display templates have been.


 * Templates for deletion/Log/2009 August 7
 * Templates for deletion/Log/2009 February 28
 * Templates for deletion/Log/2007 November 16
 * Templates for deletion/Log/2007 November 16
 * Templates for deletion/Log/2007 November 16
 * Templates for deletion/Log/2007 November 16
 * 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:Iras

 * 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 delete per WP:CSD Plastikspork (talk) 19:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Iras was deleted a while ago, this template is totally useless. Karppinen (talk) 15:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * G8 dependent on deleted parent. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:49, 8 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:AFL Win Loss Table

 * 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 delete G7. JPG-GR (talk) 05:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)



No longer required as table will be edited within the main article. Nick carson (talk) 11:30, 8 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:Objectivist philosophers

 * 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 Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 22:09, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

This recently created template is redundant to the list of theorists on the Objectivist movement template, which is used on all the relevant pages. Based on consensus both on the template's talk page and on the Objectivism cross-talk page, it has been removed from all articles due to this redundancy. RL0919 (talk) 05:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete; I agree it was redundant and potentially confusing.-RLCampbell (talk) 14:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete I concur with the nomination; the template has demarcation issues and is not a net benefit in terms of navigation in light of Objectivist movement and . Skomorokh  16:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above comments. TallNapoleon (talk) 16:54, 11 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.