Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 August 5



Top foo male golfers

 * 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. - F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 05:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Excessive navbox clutter, requires constant maintenance and adds nothing to the articles that it clutters. wjemather bigissue 19:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I watch Tiger Woods and this is the third time someone has attempted to create these templates. I actually don't see what is wrong with them, but know there have been two prior attempts at top ranked golfer templates.  I don't know where to find the prior noms though.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Two prior Tfd discussions: Templates for deletion/Log/2008 July 21 (which resulted in deletion), Templates for deletion/Log/2007 August 4 (which resulted in the deletion of several templates similar to these). wjemather bigissue 19:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Aside from the fact they add nothing to the articles they adorn, it does not take long before these kinds of templates stop being updated on a weekly basis, which is necessary as dictated by the weekly updates from the OWGR, and then they are as good as useless anyway. wjemather bigissue 19:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete all If the top ten male golfers template can't make it, then these surely can't (and shouldn't). Tewapack (talk) 19:45, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all They add nothing of merit.- William 21:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment There is even more of this sort of thing for tennis players. -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I created them purely because I saw the tennis ones and assumed no one had got round to doing it for golf. By all means scrap them if you think they're irrelevant (personally I quite like them as a feature, but I see the point about clutter), but I'd like to know what the main tennis editors think of theirs - the ranking systems in both sports are pretty similar, so on a Wikipedia-wide basis consistency one way or another would be nice. Having said that, the choices for tennis countries "honoured" seems a bit ad-hoc (Ireland?!), and when I was looking at theirs to work out how to make them, I found myself having to update several of them for the first time in weeks. So perhaps they're more of an oversight than anything on the tennis project, too. EJBH (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete golf templates per previous consensus. The fact that tennis has similar template is irrelevant here per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Either add them to this nomination, or open a separate nomination for them.  Imzadi  1979   →   03:50, 7 August 2010 (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:Infobox TransLink (SEQ) train station

 * 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 No Consensus. - F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 16:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

As redundant to Infobox station. d'oh! talk 15:14, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 16:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep until all associated pages replaced. Haven't gotten the time to replace them yet, so someone would have to help get started, or I'll start it myself in a few days (or where more time is available).  Current template is still currently being used on a lot of pages. Sb617 (Talk) 01:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "all associated pages replaced"? Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You are aware that your mass changing is breaking the infoboxes? Peachey88 (T · &#32; C) 13:19, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all as redundant. Any remaining replacements will be made at TfD closure.  Imzadi  1979   →   03:50, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - It is a required part of the QR station pages. Why would you bother deleting it? All other station pages have them, why can't Queensland have them?. MCAspire (talk) 06:29, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Infoboxes aren't required in articles, no matter how ubiquitous they've become. Having said that, the role of these nominated templates is redundant to infobox station.  Imzadi  1979   →   06:39, 9 August 2010 (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:Infobox TransLink (SEQ) train line

 * 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. - F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 05:37, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

The infobox is not needed, since another infobox is available. d'oh! talk 12:06, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant to Infobox rail line. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: Infobox TransLink (SEQ) train line colour should go too. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits
 * I agree. <b style='color:#948700;'>d'oh!</b> <sub style='color:#888;'>talk 15:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete both as redunant.  Imzadi  1979   →   03:50, 7 August 2010 (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:DLSU-Affiliates
<div class="boilerplate vfd tfd-closed" style="background-color: #e3f9df; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
 * 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. - F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 05:39, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Template is used in only one article. Instead of having this template, it would be better to put this on the article itself  JL 09 <sub style="color:#7d7d7d;cursor:help;">q?c 09:14, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No objections. Please go ahead. -- mithril cloud  13:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. When substituting, remove the scroll bar for accessibility concerns.  Imzadi  1979   →   03:50, 7 August 2010 (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.