Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 May 4



Template:Aragonese dialect

 * 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 objection to deletion. RL0919 (talk) 01:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Redundant to Infobox language, which I used to replace this template on about four pages. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:51, 4 May 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:Tramlink Lines

 * 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 objection to deletion. RL0919 (talk) 01:31, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned template Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:28, 4 May 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:Case Western Reserve Spartans football coach navbox + other identical cases

 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 18:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * - Exact same case with this one, only one red link, orphaned. - Mobius Clock  15:48, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * - More of the same from the same category, all orphans and containing only redlinks. - Mobius Clock  15:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * - More of the same from the same category, all orphans and containing only redlinks. - Mobius Clock  15:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * - More of the same from the same category, all orphans and containing only redlinks. - Mobius Clock  15:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * - More of the same from the same category, all orphans and containing only redlinks. - Mobius Clock  15:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * - More of the same from the same category, all orphans and containing only redlinks. - Mobius Clock  15:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * - More of the same from the same category, all orphans and containing only redlinks. - Mobius Clock  15:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * - More of the same from the same category, all orphans and containing only redlinks. - Mobius Clock  15:55, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned, all navbox links lead to non-existent pages. - Mobius Clock  15:43, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all. Even if they were blue links, succession boxes would be preferable, imo. Resolute 03:45, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply. I'm not going to argue to keep these navboxes. I just wanted to comment that you are part of the tiny minority on Wikipedia who thinks succession boxes are better than navboxes when it comes to award winners and coaches. So, even if they were blue links, your comment about succession boxes is irrelevant to this discussion because these were brought to TfD with the concern that they were all red-linked, not because Mobius Clock thinks succession boxes would be better. I'm not going to check this anymore so don't bother replying. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:31, 7 May 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:Burger

 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 18:18, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned, seems to serve only as a way of formatting talk page messages. Redundant to simply using wikitables if such formatting is really required. - Mobius Clock  15:36, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  Lord Speaker  ─╢ 17:22, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * This seems to have been missed following the related discussion on Launchballer (and indeed talkbubble). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Ugh. Delete per WP:DONTBEOBNOXIOUS. Resolute 03:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete extremely ugly. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 04:10, 10 May 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:FootballIDRIVEpast

 * 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) 15:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Drive itself is defunct; little need to inform people about its previous runs on talk pages with a banner. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:36, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Associated project page has been marked as historical for more than two years. --RL0919 (talk) 01:42, 12 May 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:Charleston Campaign

 * 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 objection to deletion. RL0919 (talk) 00:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Navigational box for two articles that have both been deleted; consequently, entirely useless. Nyttend (talk) 00:26, 4 May 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:Past Simpsons character

 * 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 objection to deletion. RL0919 (talk) 00:49, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned template, most likely redundant to something else, e.g., Infobox character. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 00:11, 4 May 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:Argplot
<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. RL0919 (talk) 00:46, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

This article template only serves as a disclamier ViperSnake151   Talk  00:02, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, while this isn't one of the types of disclaimer templates that is speediable, it's really not useful. How many people are likely to read an article about an alternate reality and believe that it's real?  Nyttend (talk) 00:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Argh. This looks like an explicit attempts at an end-run around the policy on in-universe material. No surprise that the three current articlespace transclusions are dreadfully low-quality articles. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:24, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, manages to violate WP:NDIA and WP:PLOT at once. Stifle (talk) 14:56, 5 May 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.