Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 October 14



Template:"Big Four" UK banks

 * 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) 00:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * "Big Four" UK banks

unused. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 21:16, 14 October 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:EditionPoints

 * 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) 00:55, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * EditionPoints

single use template, which could be merged with the prose in the corresponding section. In the thread concerning this template here, I do not see strong consensus for its use. If we need it, we can just substitute the template (without all the collapsible junk). Frietjes (talk) 21:06, 14 October 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:Altline dark purple

 * 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) 00:07, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Altline dark purple
 * Altline light purple
 * Altline dark red
 * Altline white

These are rather old templates which were used to create lines of alternating colour in sidebar boxes. I have replaced most of them with the now standard and more modern sidebar template, which doesn't use it (see template:Catalan/Valencian cultural domain‎ for example). If we want alternating colours we should use css classes per wp:deviations, like "navbox-even" and "navbox-odd". For an example of how to do this in a sidebar see template:Cosmic Marvel, which combines sidebar with navbox. Frietjes (talk) 15:34, 14 October 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:Deletedpage

 * 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. As there were no comments on this, it seems that this is an uncontroversial deletion, and so now let's finally put this template to bed. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:32, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Deletedpage

This template was used on pages that had been deleted and should not be recreated; it was superceded by the present creation protection prior to September 2007. In September 2007 a previous TfD closed with the outcome to replace the template with a protected redirect to Protected titles. That redirect was nominated for deletion last month at Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 September 6. During the discussion the redirect was boldly converted back to a template, although subsequent discussion neither reflected this nor came to a consensus, although some comments there are relevant here too. As it is no longer a redirect but a template I've brought the discussion here rather than relisting it at RfD. The landscape has changed since September 2007, and creation protection is a mature system now so I think it worthwhile to reexamine the previous TfD rather than simply defer to it. This nomination should be seen as procedural only, and while I do have an opinion I am not going to express it unless others would be happy it would not be inapropriate given my closure of the RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 11:27, 14 October 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:Uw-tweak

 * 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) 17:33, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Uw-tweak

A "humor" template which is only very mildly humorous, and could easily be mistaken for a serious warning. I'm not against humor; I just fail to see the benefit of non-funny humor. (I can't get exact phrase searching to work at the moment, for some reason, so I can't tell you if it has ever been used.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Harmless at best, aggravating at worst (if construed to be an off-handed swipe at a third editor). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 23:26, 20 October 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:Uw-hangonnocsd

 * 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. — This, that, and the other (talk) 23:16, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Uw-hangonnocsd

Hangon templates are no longer used. Not needed. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:02, 14 October 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:—/meta/shortname

 * 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) 00:21, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * —/meta/shortname

Unused; not needed. (On another note, what system uses these "/meta/shortname" templates? They are mostly not subpages, despite the naming pattern.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:55, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * delete this one. The "foo/meta/shortname" templates are used by templates like party name with colour. Frietjes (talk) 15:41, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Why does that template not use a naming scheme like "Template:Party shortname/....."? That would make much more sense. — This, that, and the other (talk) 23:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably because this meta data is used by more than one template. however, I don't know why this meta data isn't a subpage of the article. some historical reason I'm sure. Frietjes (talk) 16:23, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Articles can't have subpages. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:10, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Really, and what is Chaos/old version? Frietjes (talk) 23:56, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete completely unused and unusableCurb Chain (talk) 00:42, 15 October 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:Ethnic groups in Vojvodina
<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. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ethnic groups in Vojvodina

Declined db-reason, with rationale:
 * see Template:Ethnic groups in Serbia

While this is a procedural nomination, I agree that it is a duplicate and should be replaced with that other template. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:49, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: Compared to a "Template:Ethnic groups in Bavaria"->Ethnic groups in Germany. Duplicate data.--Zoupan (talk) 19:41, 14 October 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:Xoomworks limited
<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 Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 00:22, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Xoomworks limited

Not notable; not useful; promotional; unused. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:05, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment The main article Xoomworks has been speedily deleted twice.  The creator is a WP:SPA and has a WP:COI.  This is an attempt at promotion and spam using a different venue.  Note I am not !voting.Curb Chain (talk) 00:40, 15 October 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:Yugumo class destroyer armament
<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 Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 00:22, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yugumo class destroyer armament

Unused armament template. Superseded by infobox at Yugumo class destroyer. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Delete Unused and superseded. Brad (talk) 19:54, 18 October 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.