Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2009 October 11



Template:Moths of Michigan

 * 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

Unnecessary article clutter, as these species have very wide distributions and nearly all of the articles do not even mention Michigan. Were these templates to become comprehensive for every subnational entity in which these species have been observed, even the collapsed templates would swamp most articles' actual content. The template has been tagged for merging to a list since February; the merge tag accidentally broke the template so it wasn't even showing up on any pages. Apparently no one noticed. All of the included information, including the taxonomic organization, has already been merged to List of butterflies and moths of Michigan. Postdlf (talk) 19:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Navbox connecting articles based on a tenuous association. Many insect species appear in every state of the US and numerous other countries. --RL0919 (talk) 17:02, 12 October 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:GWCPresidents

 * 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

Found this incompleted nomination of April 7, 2009. I support deletion, because there is no reason to have a template with only 4 links (of which 1 is redlinked). Debresser (talk) 00:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not only is one of the four a redlink, another redirects to the main article about the school. So there are not enough distinct links to justify a navbox. Could be recreated in the future if/when the school has a longer history with more articles about its presidents to link. --RL0919 (talk) 16:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per RL0919's rationale. - Masonpatriot (talk) 18:55, 12 October 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.