Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 November 4



Template:Atlanta buildings

 * 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. No objections lodged. Red rose64 (talk) 11:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Atlanta buildings

The template is a collection of buildings which have nothing in common. By the author's definition they are buildings which do not fit into the Atlanta landmarks or Atlanta skyscraper templates. Buildings which are "left over" are not a group which makes sense. The category "Buildings and structures in Atlanta" serves this purpose. Also the template is present on only a couple of pages, which may be an indication that it is not useful.Keizers (talk) 14:59, 7 November 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:English criminal law

 * 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. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 07:08, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * English criminal law

This template appears to be redundant to a better designed template, namely, Template:English criminal law navbox. It does not appear to be used on any articles, and I can't see why anyone would want to use it when the other template is available, which is less invasive and has more links which are more relevant (i.e. Template:English criminal law hasn't been kept up to date and it would be a waste of time to bring up to date). James500 (talk) 22:21, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Amen. delete. Ironholds (talk) 03:47, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I would say that choosing a footer or a sidebar should be a stylistic choice of article authors, and thus both should be kept, possibly renaming this to Template:English criminal law sidebar. Though both should probably be merged and a parameter switch be used to choose the format of the template. 65.94.77.11 (talk) 08:13, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * This template is also very difficult to maintain due to the need to insert  at the end of each line. It seems to be impossible to determine where the line should end except by trial and error. I tried to update the template myself but found that it was just too difficult.
 * As for stylistic considerations, I cannot see any evidence that anyone actually wants to use a sidebar. James500 (talk) 12:46, 5 November 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 GMJHL team

 * 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. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 07:08, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Infobox GMJHL team

unused, articles are using "infobox Pro hockey team". Frietjes (talk) 20:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:54, 7 November 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 Friends season episode list

 * 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. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 07:08, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Infobox Friends season episode list
 * Infobox Friends season 1 episode list

old, unused, and replaced by a different navigation method. Frietjes (talk) 20:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:54, 7 November 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 Football UEFA Euro Championship

 * 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. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 07:09, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Infobox Football UEFA Euro Championship

unused and probably redundant to some "international football competition" box. Frietjes (talk) 20:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:54, 7 November 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 EIHL team

 * 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. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 07:09, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Infobox EIHL team

unused and redundant to template:infobox Pro hockey team. I was going to deploy this, but then noticed that over half the teams were just using "infobox Pro hockey team" instead and the other half were using hardcoded tables. so i converted the hardcoded tables to use "infobox Pro hockey team". Frietjes (talk) 20:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:54, 7 November 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:William Hill (bookmaker)

 * 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  Ron h jones (Talk) 01:00, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * William Hill (bookmaker)

Template violates WP:NOTLINK and currently only links to one article. Armbrust Talk to me about my editsreview  19:25, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as spamCurb Chain (talk) 19:52, 4 November 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:User no-0

 * 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 procedural close. Userboxes should be nominated at Miscellany for deletion even in template namespace. (NAC) Armbrust Talk to me about my editsreview  19:31, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * User no-0

Category:User no-0 was speedily deleted and 0-level categories have been deleted per consensus (see User categories for discussion/Archive/March 2007), so shouldn't their corresponding templates be deleted as well? Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 17:33, 4 November 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 Bilateral relations organisation

 * 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. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 07:10, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Infobox Bilateral relations organisation

unused and we have template:infobox organisation, of which this appears to be a fork. Frietjes (talk) 17:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:54, 7 November 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 Bangladesh division

 * 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. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 07:10, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Infobox Bangladesh division

Bangladesh has 7 divisions, all of which are using template:infobox settlement directly, rather than this wrapper. Frietjes (talk) 17:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:54, 7 November 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:Mexico U20 Squad 1993

 * 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. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 07:11, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Mexico U20 Squad 1993

It should not be created since its not a men's tournament. There is also many red links.  GoPurple  'n  Gold24   05:51, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per this Tfd--Oleola (talk) 21:25, 12 November 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:Muslim Name

 * 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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Muslim Name

Unclear purpose, just one transclusion, creates an external link. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete unused; possible advertising purposeCurb Chain (talk) 17:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * speedy delete as "db-test". Frietjes (talk) 23:07, 4 November 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:1998 K-1 Events

 * 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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:18, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * 1998 K-1 Events

also nominating: both templates are full of redirects and are thus pointless. LibStar (talk) 02:00, 26 October 2011 (UTC) <hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Template:1999 K-1 Events
 * Comment I see from Articles for deletion/K-1 Japan '98 Kamikaze that the redirects for the 1998 template entries were "out of process" and have been reverted. Most (but not all) of the articles linked to are at AfD now. Thincat (talk) 14:38, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * relist and see what happens with the AFDs. if the articles are deleted/redirected, then we don't need this.  if they stay, then we will need this. Frietjes (talk) 23:41, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer 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) 03:43, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * 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.