Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 June 17



Template:Q

 * 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) 01:30, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what the use for this is, it's both easier and takes less space to just type "_" then. In addition it's in violation of WP:PUNCT, which states typographic style is not recommended, and this template appears to be encouraging its use.  X  eworlebi (talk) 16:15, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * delete as it violates MOS:QUOTATION MARK. the other "feature" supported by this template is, I believe, handled by another icon template.  having a template with two entirely orthogonal functions is a bad idea. Frietjes (talk) 16:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. -- Zero TalkContribs  01:40, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - It's easier to use "" -- The Σ talkcontribs 23:55, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - its not just for "these quotes" but other quote marks as well. See documentation "This template may be used where there are different national varieties of English spelling within standard quotes in an article's text susceptible of being acted upon by the EngvarB script – particularly in articles already tagged with, , templates" -- Avanu (talk) 17:01, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete – the template creates more confusion than it helps avoid. If there are shortcoming related to the EngvarB script, then modify the script.—Biosketch (talk) 07:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete MOS violation. J IM ptalk·cont 16:36, 20 June 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 Pahlavi Shah

 * 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) 19:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)



There were only ever two Pahlavi shahs, according to Pahlavi dynasty. Infobox royalty appears to be used on their articles. This template is unused and unneeded. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:00, 17 June 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:Deprecated license

 * 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) 19:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)



Unused. Old proposal. No longer needed. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:56, 17 June 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.