Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 July 14



Template:Redlist

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 17:26, 24 July 2011 (UTC)



Unused template; duplicates a long series of other templates used for citing the IUCN Red List. Ucucha 23:39, 14 July 2011 (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 Län

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 18:50, 23 July 2011 (UTC)



Orphaned, clunky, overly specific, should use Template:Infobox Settlement. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:12, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Templates_for_discussion resulted in deletion.  I do not know how similar these 2 infoboxes where.Curb Chain (talk) 10:08, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant to Template:Infobox Settlement. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:55, 17 July 2011 (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:Aes Dana

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 17:24, 24 July 2011 (UTC)



Only navigates two articles (a third is PROD-ed) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not enough articles to warrant a navbox. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:56, 17 July 2011 (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 Province GR

 * 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 keep. JPG-GR (talk) 17:23, 24 July 2011 (UTC)



Redundant and forgotten old infobox. Could be easily replaced by Infobox Settlement. Darwinek (talk) 17:34, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep This is just a wrapper for Template:Infobox former subdivision. If there should be a merger between that template and Infobox Settlement, it should be brought up on the talk pages of one or both templates. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:38, 14 July 2011 (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 District Slovakia

 * 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 keep. JPG-GR (talk) 17:22, 24 July 2011 (UTC)



Redundant and ugly old infobox. Could be easily replaced by Infobox Settlement. - Darwinek (talk) 17:29, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Should just be implemented as a customized wrapper for infobox settlement, which I just did. Now the uses need some conversion because the population and population date are currently combined in one field, which causes errors for infobox settlement. done. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:11, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep as modified by Calliopejen1; otherwise delete. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:16, 15 July 2011 (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:BRPortalframeless

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 17:22, 24 July 2011 (UTC)



Unused and redundant to the generic portal frameless and cousins. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 15:37, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete used only for british railwaysCurb Chain (talk) 09:41, 16 July 2011 (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 County Estonia

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 18:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)



Orphaned, clunky, overly specific, should use Template:Infobox Settlement. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:43, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. - Darwinek (talk) 17:30, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:14, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:58, 17 July 2011 (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:Cristian Alexanda

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 17:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)



serves no purpose, Not everything needs a navbox. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:13, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - of no value, since it only navigates two articles (and one of those is only tangentially related). Robofish (talk) 21:01, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete -- for so few articles, they can be linked in the articles' text. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:59, 17 July 2011 (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:IPAhelp2col

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 18:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)



This template is a content copy (intentionally) from, the difference is that the list is spread over two columns. This one is not used in itself (it is mentioned in standard documentation pages). In general, we do not need a formatting-variant. Its current layout needs a redo; though that is not a reason for deletion, it points to low interest and usage. DePiep (talk) 09:22, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Indeed. If the single-column layout is suboptimal then that should be fixed directly rather than through a fork. FWIW CSS columns would be a much better way to do this than yet another table-within-a-table as the forked copy does. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:02, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, unused and unnecessary duplicate. Angr (talk) 10:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per thumperward's eloquent argumentsCurb Chain (talk) 09:26, 16 July 2011 (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 Argentinian Department

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 18:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)



Overly specific and clunky, replaced by Template:Infobox Settlement. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:00, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 08:12, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. - Darwinek (talk) 17:30, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:00, 17 July 2011 (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 District Peru

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 18:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)



Orphaned, overly specific (should use Template:Infobox Settlement. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:30, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 08:12, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. - Darwinek (talk) 17:30, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:00, 17 July 2011 (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.

Rugby union positional templates

 * 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. JPG-GR (talk) 18:55, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc
 * and RU position/doc

Trivial text substitution that has been subbed by redirects and proper disambiguated links (for all but RU position and Scrum-half which still needs to be done). These should now be deleted as the redirects now exist. This will de-populate category:rugby union position templates as well which should also be deleted once these templates have been deleted. --Bob247 (talk) 05:19, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete This should be uncontroversial. The previous deletion discussion a year ago was closed with an emerging consensus to depreciate. WikiProject Rugby union was recently informed and a note was left on the article talk page and no opposition was raised to substituting them. This has now been done and they are no longer needed. Just need to finish off Scrum-half and RU position AIR corn (talk) 06:11, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought this had been sorted a long time ago. As the original author of, I have no objections to this. Not that that counts for anything, not claiming any kind of ownership, just to note why I wrote it in the first place, which was to show you didn't need the other fifteen separate templates, so in one way I would say delete the other fifteen and keep RU position, but if the folks at WikiProject Rugby Union are happy, even that is unnecessary: one can just write the position longhand, how is "" any easier, or better, to write than "scrum half"?. So delete. Si Trew (talk) 07:31, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh good. As the majority of the uses of these templates have been uncontroversially substituted by now, I think that it stands to reason to clean the rest up formally now. Thanks to everyone involved in the substitution work. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Done Scrum-half and RU positions. Should be good to go. AIR corn (talk) 10:25, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as trivial. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:02, 17 July 2011 (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.