Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 March 11



Template:FALink

 * 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 and no objections to deletion. RL0919 (talk) 22:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Unless I am missing something, this one is unused and not working. I can withdraw if I am wrong. Magioladitis (talk) 21:49, 11 March 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:Replay Media Catcher

 * 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 and no objections to deletion. RL0919 (talk) 22:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Unused template loop intended for use on one article that is currently prod'ed Nick—Contact/Contribs 21:23, 11 March 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:Ficha de autoridad

 * 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) 03:39, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Unused template loop that appears to have been copied from another Wikipedia Nick—Contact/Contribs 21:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delele - it's from Spanish es:Plantilla:Ficha de autoridad. Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 02:51, 12 March 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:Dinagat Islands

 * 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) 07:57, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Dinagat Islands is no longer a province of the Philippines as the Philippine Supreme Court declared the creation of the said province was unconstitutional. All of the wiki links included in the template redirects to Surigao del Norte province where it is located. Therefore, this template cannot be used anymore.  JL 09 q?c 16:21, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. There is no inherent reason that articles (and by extension, navboxes for those articles) can't be about political entities that no longer exist. See Category:Former subdivisions of countries for numerous examples. So this template could be used, with a little bit of rewording so it doesn't sound like it is about a current province. That said, it isn't used currently, so I'm not opposing deletion. --RL0919 (talk) 14:36, 18 March 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 Student

 * 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 Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 03:29, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

unused looping template. Seems to be trying to provide an infobox for a specific non notable student. noq (talk) 09:41, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. JohnCD (talk) 11:11, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Plus, the idea of an infobox for a student seems like it would inherently be used on non-notable articles.  If the student who happens to be the subject of a Wikipedia article does meet notability guidelines, there is probably another infobox that can be used.  --Nick—Contact/Contribs 21:13, 11 March 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:Filmography of Simbudevan

 * 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) 08:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Only navigates three films. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:12, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 02:38, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep because three films is a sufficient set for a highlighted arrangement. The director's other works would otherwise not be available in the footer for readers to follow with ease if they want to visit these articles, too. Erik (talk) 16:34, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 00:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not enough links to make a useful navbox. Can recreate if/when there are more articles to link. --RL0919 (talk) 23:53, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * 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.