Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 February 13



Template:Final Olympic torchbearers

 * 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. Jafeluv (talk) 12:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

This template attempts to link random people together by what is, ultimately, a trivial link. Virtually none of these people are notable for being the final torch bearer at the Olympics, and the template indiscriminately tries to link hockey players with figure skaters with doctors with children with people who aren't even notable. Resolute 19:34, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - This template links together people who have a place in the history of the Olympic Games. Chris (talk) 19:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Except that you are linking dozens of unrelated articles indiscriminately using a triviality as the common link. Resolute 19:42, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I looked for them, but there were little to know links on the Internet about them. Chris (talk) 19:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete – We don't need a navbox to summarize the List of people who have lit the Olympic Cauldron page. This isn't what navboxes are intended to link together. Articles in a series, yes.  Articles that are related by a non-defining trait, no. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Andrwsc -- I can't phrase it any better. THF (talk) 23:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Andrwsc -- Rillian (talk) 00:35, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - an ephemeral and non-defining characteristic, so not really suitable for navigation. 81.111.114.131 (talk) 16:16, 14 February 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:Otheruses1

 * 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, but keep in the short term, until the large number of transclusions can be corrected.

Deprecated. 174.3.98.236 (talk) 02:49, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * redirect to about - since about evolved out of this otheruses template (at one time all the hatnote dab templates were called "otheruses#") 70.29.210.242 (talk) 06:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment you seem to be deleting dab hatnote templates at several day intervals between nominations. This is a rather odd behaviour pattern. Why not just list them all at one time? 70.29.210.242 (talk) 06:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I assume the nominator is just trying to weed out hatnote templates that may be unnecessary. --RL0919 (talk) 22:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. We have way too many hatnote templates (and redirects, and so forth). Consolidating them might, one day, make it possible to modify an existing one without having to review the entire hatnote documentation for special cases. At least, I can dream, can't I? — Gavia immer (talk) 16:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Entirely redundant to About. Gavia immer makes a good point about the excessive number of hatnote templates. --RL0919 (talk) 22:04, 21 February 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:NTU Renegades roster

 * 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

Unused. Last edit was 15 Sept. Article it relates to is dubiously notable. Pit-yacker (talk) 01:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unused and only applicable to a single page if it were used. --RL0919 (talk) 22:01, 21 February 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:Last Comic Standing 6

 * 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 Magioladitis (talk) 13:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Superfluous: the vast majority of the articles linked are unsourced BLPs that flunk WP:N and have been turned into redirects. THF (talk) 23:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as there is already LastComicStanding, and if necessary, notable individual season participants could be listed there. However, as stated, most are not going to be notable. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk)  23:10, 21 February 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:Bausteindesign5

 * 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

Copy paste from de.wikipedia, we have our own meta templates like all the mboxes which should be used instead. Only used a few times, of which some are even nominated for deletion, so replacing it shouldn't be too complicated. The Evil IP address (talk) 10:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I am concerned that at the deletion of the S-Bahn templates (not listed here, but marked for deletion and using this template) as that could screw up a number of articles now and in the future. The articles on German railways are being steadily expanded and these templates display the S-Bahn (commuter railway) symbols in the route diagrams, colour-coded. They are part of a massive series of route symbols already adapted from de.wiki. If they already exist somewhere in en.wiki, we could simply do a redirect, but I am not aware that they do. See below for revised vote. --Bermicourt (talk) 10:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh no, they won't be deleted. It seems that Twinkle wasn't able to add a noinclude around the Tfd template, which is why every use of it is also proposed for deletion. The only template to change would be Vorlagendokumentation S-Bahn-Linie, where for example an ombox could be used. This template also fits more into our style here. I can do that if you want. --The Evil IP address (talk) 16:27, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Support provided, as you suggest, that the S-Bahn symbols are still supported. Very happy if you can sort that out; I'm more a translator than a template ninja! --Bermicourt (talk) 21:28, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅, converted into ombox, the templates should now no longer be put up for deletion. --The Evil IP address (talk) 14:54, 15 February 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 Fernsehsendung

 * 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

Copy paste from de.wikipedia, own templates like Infobox television should be used, as they're always up to date. The Evil IP address (talk) 09:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Content. As only one article links to this at present the above logic holds and I am content as the original author with deletion as long as it is replaced with the suggested table. --Bermicourt (talk) 10:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete, obsolete. I just replaced the Infobox Fernsehsendung at Eisenbahn-Romantik with Infobox television. Markussep Talk 13:09, 15 February 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:Vorlageninfo

 * 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

Copy paste from de.wikipedia, where the template has been deleted in the meantime as being "deprecated", not necessary here. Only used on one other template that I'll nominate for deletion shortly. The Evil IP address (talk) 09:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Supported as long as it is replaced and not left hanging. --Bermicourt (talk) 10:21, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Template deletions are not undertaken lightly. One should assume that this includes anything that needs to be done both to prepare for it and to clean up after it, so nothing is "left hanging".  81.111.114.131 (talk) 16:24, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete, isn't used anymore. Markussep Talk 13:10, 15 February 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:Fanboy and Chum Chum

 * 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 as redundant to a template with a wider scope.

Not enough content for a template. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 05:50, 13 February 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.