Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 September 16



Template:Sutton 13

 * 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, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sutton 13

No indication that this "group" of 13 uni's is used outside the scope of one UK charity. Mt king  (edits)  23:51, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Support deletion - this was purely a group of universities identified by one charity for the purposes of enabling it to monitor social inclusion and a template is WP:UNDUE. The description of the 13 in the Sutton Trust article is sufficient.Rangoon11 (talk) 12:07, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. This isn't a formal association of universities, just a list compiled by the Sutton Trust and so I don't think it warrants a template. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:52, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --John (talk) 17:17, 20 September 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:Teargarden

 * 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) 00:08, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Teargarden

According to WP:NAVBOX, a navigational template is for easing navigation between related and existing articles. On this template, Teargarden by Kaleidyscope, Vol. 1: Songs for a Sailor, Teargarden by Kaleidyscope, Vol. 2: The Solstice Bare, Vol. 3 and Owata all redirect back to Teargarden by Kaleidyscope. Sweet Relief Musicians Fund and The Tear Garden are completely irrelevant, and The Vampire Diaries and The Fool (Tarot card) are only marginally related. This only leaves four directly related articles—Oceania (album), A Song for a Son, Widow Wake My Mind (The Smashing Pumpkins song) (which probably wouldn't survive an AFD) and Freak (The Smashing Pumpkins song)—all of which are already collected on The Smashing Pumpkins. Fezmar9 (talk) 22:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Half the items are redirects, and another group of them should probably be removed altogether due to being irrelevant. Once you remove the things that shouldn't be on there, there's only 3 or so actual items, which is not enough to warrant the template, especially since those items are already on the overall band navbox. Sergecross73   msg me   16:42, 19 September 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:Ship fate box target

 * 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 after substitution Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 13:49, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ship fate box target

Most of these are unused, see below, but this one is still being used in a handful of articles. I think it should be substituted and deleted, or, create a more advanced, single template which includes "target" as one of the options. I would have grouped this one with the ones below, but it is technically still in use. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 22:43, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Substitute and delete. Simple text substitution. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:17, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Substitute and delete and the other templates you mentioned should go the same way albeit with a separate nom. Brad (talk) 20:31, 20 September 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:Ship ...

 * 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) 14:01, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ship aircraft box Arleigh Burke class destroyer II
 * Ship aircraft box Arleigh Burke class destroyer I
 * Ship aircraft box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship aircraft box none
 * Ship aircraft table no
 * Ship aircraft
 * Ship armament
 * Ship armament box Arleigh Burke class destroyer III
 * Ship armament box Arleigh Burke class destroyer II
 * Ship armament box Arleigh Burke class destroyer I
 * Ship armament box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship armament box none
 * Ship armament table no
 * Ship armour table yes
 * Ship armor table yes
 * Ship boats table yes
 * Ship box USS Radford (DD-120)
 * Ship builder table yes
 * Ship capacity table no
 * Ship capacity table yes
 * Ship captured table 2 yes
 * Ship captured table no
 * Ship captured table yes
 * Ship career table yes
 * Ship career 2 table yes
 * Ship christened table yes
 * Ship commissioned table no
 * Ship commissioned table yes
 * Ship commissioned table 2 yes
 * Ship complement box Arleigh Burke class destroyer II
 * Ship complement box Arleigh Burke class destroyer I
 * Ship complement box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship complement box none
 * Ship complement
 * Ship decommissioned table 1 no
 * Ship decommissioned table 2 no
 * Ship decommissioned table 2 yes
 * Ship decommissioned table 2nd yes
 * Ship decommissioned table 3 no
 * Ship decommissioned table 3 yes
 * Ship decommissioned table 4 yes
 * Ship decommissioned table yes
 * Ship displacement box Arleigh Burke class destroyer III
 * Ship displacement box Arleigh Burke class destroyer II
 * Ship displacement box Arleigh Burke class destroyer I
 * Ship displacement box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship displacement box none
 * Ship displacement
 * Ship draught box Arleigh Burke class destroyer
 * Ship draught box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship draught box none
 * Ship draught table yes
 * Ship draught variant uk
 * Ship draught variant us
 * Ship draught
 * Ship endurance box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship endurance box none
 * Ship endurance table no
 * Ship endurance table yes
 * Ship fate box 2 building
 * Ship fate box 2 in reserve
 * Ship fate box 2 museum ship
 * Ship fate box 2 ordered
 * Ship fate box 2 scrapped
 * Ship fate box 2 sunk enemy action
 * Ship fate box 2 target
 * Ship fate box 2 transferred
 * Ship fate box 2 unknown
 * Ship fate box 2 wrecked
 * Ship fate box awaiting disposal
 * Ship fate box disposed
 * Ship fate box exploded
 * Ship fate box in reserve
 * Ship fate box museum ship
 * Ship fate box ordered
 * Ship fate box scrapped
 * Ship fate box scuttled
 * Ship fate box sold for commercial service
 * Ship fate box sunk enemy action
 * Ship fate box transferred
 * Ship fate box unknown
 * Ship fate box wrecked
 * Ship fate table 2 fate
 * Ship fate table 2 status
 * Ship fate table status
 * Ship homeport table 2 yes
 * Ship homeport table no
 * Ship homeport table yes
 * Ship honours table yes
 * Ship in service table yes
 * Ship in service table 2 yes
 * Ship in service table no
 * Ship length box Arleigh Burke class destroyer I
 * Ship length box Arleigh Burke class destroyer II
 * Ship length box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship length box none
 * Ship length
 * Ship motto table yes
 * Ship nickname table yes
 * Ship out of service table yes
 * Ship out of service table 2 yes
 * Ship out of service table no
 * Ship propulsion box Arleigh Burke class destroyer
 * Ship propulsion box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship propulsion box none
 * Ship purchased table no
 * Ship purchased table yes
 * Ship range box none
 * Ship range table no
 * Ship recommissioned table 1 no
 * Ship recommissioned table 2 yes
 * Ship recommissioned table 2 no
 * Ship recommissioned table 3 yes
 * Ship recommissioned table 3 no
 * Ship recommissioned table no
 * Ship recommissioned table yes
 * Ship reinstated table no
 * Ship reinstated table yes
 * Ship renamed table yes
 * Ship sensors box Arleigh Burke class destroyer II
 * Ship sensors box Arleigh Burke class destroyer I
 * Ship sensors box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship sensors box none
 * Ship sensors table no
 * Ship sensors table yes
 * Ship speed box Arleigh Burke class destroyer
 * Ship speed
 * Ship status table yes
 * Ship struck table 2 yes
 * Ship struck table no
 * Ship table box EW yes
 * Ship table box armament yes
 * Ship table box armour yes
 * Ship table box capacity yes
 * Ship table box home port yes
 * Ship table box range yes
 * Ship table box sensors yes
 * Ship table box time to activate yes
 * Ship table career yes
 * Ship table code decommissioned
 * Ship table code
 * Ship table commissioned
 * Ship table decommissioned
 * Ship time to activate box none
 * Ship time to activate table no
 * Ship time to activate table yes
 * Ship EW box Arleigh Burke class destroyer II
 * Ship EW box Arleigh Burke class destroyer I
 * Ship EW box Invincible class aircraft carrier
 * Ship EW box none
 * Ship EW table no
 * Ship EW table yes
 * Ship EW
 * Ship Homeport PEN
 * Category:Military shipbox templates

old and unused. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 21:50, 16 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Does that include everything at User:GraemeLeggett? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, plus about 20 more. If you do a prefix search, you will find about six or seven more which I didn't list (because they were not orphaned) and a load of redirects, which should probably go with these if they are orphaned. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 21:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, provided they are all in fact "old and unused". I can see no reason to keep these arcane and obsolete templates, many of which seem to date from the days before ParserFunctions. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:55, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Most of these templates were discussed at WP:ships here in November 2009 but they were never deleted. The templates were used in an outdated infobox which has long been replaced and deleted. Brad (talk) 20:38, 20 September 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:Sheffield Supertram insert

 * 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 <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 16:10, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sheffield Supertram insert

old and unused. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 21:24, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, a much more generalised system of railway templates has been developed since I created this template in 2005, so it is no longer required. David Arthur (talk) 21:58, 16 September 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:Settlecollapse
<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) 16:09, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Settlecollapse

old and unused. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 21:22, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, I'm the sole author and have no need for it.--Kotniski (talk) 11:14, 17 September 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:Serkland Runestones
<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) 00:13, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Serkland Runestones

superceded by template:Ingvar Runestones. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 21:20, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Since the article it was created for no longer exists I'd support a delete /Lokal_Profil 13:51, 22 September 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:Serie A de Ecuador
<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) 00:14, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Serie A de Ecuador

unused and provides no useful navigation. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 21:18, 16 September 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:Serbian historical regions
<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) 16:14, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Serbian historical regions

unused. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 21:16, 16 September 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:Sgn
<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) 00:15, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sgn

This template was created five years ago and remains without a single transclusion (discounting the doc & the template page itself). It's a very simple mathematical function that can easily be coded using. I suppose that it's not used because it's too simplistic to be worth having a template for. (I know I've coded the same thing with .) J IM ptalk·cont 02:44, 16 September 2011 (UTC)


 * We really don't need to maintain general-purpose mathematical helper templates just for the sake of it. Were it in use then there might be a reason to keep this around, but not when it's been long unused. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 08:08, 16 September 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:Gmina Chełm Śląski
<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 no consensus, given that this is one of a larger series, it would seem useful to keep it for consistency. Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 17:39, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Gmina Chełm Śląski

WP:NENAN or how I learned to stop worrying and three articles does not a template warrant. Liquidcheeze (talk) 18:47, 6 September 2011 (UTC) <hr style="width:55%;" />
 * 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) 02:17, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

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


 * Relisting comment, this appears to be one of a large series of templates. Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 02:17, 16 September 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:Cite GameFAQs
<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) 22:38, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Cite GameFAQs

The template is used on 3 articles to cite unreliable pages on the website. Per WikiProject_Video_games/Sources, GameFAQs is not generally considered a reliable source. Template is also superseded by, and a wrapper of, cite web. Odie5533 (talk) 16:50, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The page that it is used to cite are deemed reliable at WP:VG/S. It is the data page where the info comes from developers and shared databases across IGN, Gamespot, and others. If it is unreliable, then so is every date out there from any database.
 * There are a few select dates that are user-submitted and reviewed. Those are clearly marked as such. Those we do not consider reliable, but as mentioned, they will be clearly marked as such with the user's alias to give them credit. If they lack anything, they are from that database or sumbitted by the game's developer.
 * I will also note I reverted the long-standing change made by the nominator hereo the guideline in order to help get this template removed. There was no discussion at WT:VG/S or the main talk page prior to his nominator that would support this. I request this as a SPEEDY KEEP considering the circumstances. 陣 内 Jinnai 18:06, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * My change was not vandalism as your edit summary suggests. I did not even know this template existed when I made that change and it had absolutely nothing to do with this nomination. The change was made 6 days ago and is hardly long-standing. Your accusations clearly go against the fourth pillar of Wikipedia, are misguided, and false. --Odie5533 (talk) 19:27, 4 September 2011 (UTC)


 * We don't need wrappers for citation of every given website, especially those which aren't generally reliable sources. Nor does the argument for a speedy keep here carry any water. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 19:54, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It is because there are numerous points we need to cite dates for release, and only such dates. The template is designed to reduce page load on larger articles and list articles with numerous links. It is being used and it is a reliable source for what I've mentioned above. It is designed in such a way that it cannot be used to cite anything but said page. 陣 内 Jinnai 03:18, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * How does it "reduce page load" to call cite web through a wrapper template? You'd reduce load even more just by calling it directly. It's still not obvious why a sub-template is needed here: are you suggesting that using a sub-template somehow blesses these particular transclusions with "slightly more reliable" status? Because that's an editorial issue to be enforced with consensus on those few pages where this comes up rather than enforced through a template. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:55, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete overly specific, just use cite web. It saves what? Two characters? Yeah, that's really gonna save the strain. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 06:00, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It's quite a pain in the ass when you have to add 50 cites to the same website that can be handled much more smoothly with a template.
 * Anyway, if this is deleted, I would ask that a bot go in and change the references to cite web because it'll impact multiple pages which will suddenly have unusable refs. 陣 内 Jinnai 03:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * I would ask that any vote to keep or delete this template wait until the discussion at WT:VG/S concludes. Gamespot shares the database with GameFAQs as noted from the link there and Gamespot is generally considered reliable for its dates. As the main arguments for deleting this are based on the fact that GameFAQs is was recently changed its status from a situational source (reliable for their release info page) to unreliable. 陣 内 Jinnai 22:42, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd argue that even if GameFAQs was a reliable source, we still don't need this template. So there is no need to wait. --Odie5533 (talk) 23:24, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Just because you don't personally use it, doesn't mean it doesn't have uses, especially in long lists. 陣 内 Jinnai 16:19, 10 September 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) 01:41, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" /> <pre style="overflow:auto">


 * delete after replacement with a standard cite web template. If the author wants a fast method for generating these references, I would be happy to help him develop a shortcut in userspace which can be substituted to generate the same result (see above) and include the ref tags around it. Frietjes (talk) 17:38, 30 September 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:WikiProject Myrtle Beach
<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, unused, can be revived if needed. Plastikspork <sub style="font-size: 60%">―Œ <sup style="margin-left:-3ex">(talk) 01:41, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Myrtle Beach

Deprecated, unused. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:02, 4 September 2011 (UTC) <hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Keep for now - Althought his template is currently deprecated (only became so in the last month) I think we need to keep it for a little while longer along with the others associated to WikiProject United States. I will modify the template to be a wrapper and I think that will sufficiently solve the problem. I don't think there's any harm in leaving it for a while in case the project decides to break away from US. --Kumioko (talk) 14:46, 4 September 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) 01:32, 16 September 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.

Template:Cumbrian Coast Line
<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) 00:16, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Cumbrian Coast Line

Superseded by "Cumbrian Coast Line" section of Cumbria railway stations. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:06, 4 September 2011 (UTC) <hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Delete. I prefer its vertical format to the cramped format of Cumbria railway stations. But if anyone ever wants it back, it can easily be re-created from this historical state - I should have acknowledged in the edit summary whence I had copied it. &mdash; RHaworth 08:44, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete (see below) and expand to a route map. There's a big difference between the coast line as a primarily geographic list and a vast block of station names that is almost unintelligible, owing to its size. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep the two templates seem to be designed for different purposes - looks to be intended as an inline listing of principal stations on the line in the style of a routebox (which it could easily become);  is an end-of-article navbox listing every station. Neither it redundant to the other. Thryduulf (talk) 11:20, 6 September 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) 01:32, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * delete as unused and redundant or redirect to Cumbrian Coast Line RDT. Andy Dingley and Thryduulf say we should convert it to a routebox, but if we did that it would then be redundant to .  So, I see no valid keep votes here. Frietjes (talk) 19:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Even better. I'm for deletion then, after we've changed any uses of it to use Cumbrian Coast Line RDT instead. There's no even a problem with size. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:45, 16 September 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.