Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 January 23



Template:SputnikmusicAlbum

 * 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 relisted on 2014 February 2 Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:39, 2 February 2014 (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:Todo-buffy

 * 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 relisted on 2014 February 2 Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:39, 2 February 2014 (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.

WikiProject UK geography/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 relisted on 2014 February 2 Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:37, 2 February 2014 (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.

Wisconsin metros

 * 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) 23:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Beloit, Wisconsin
 * Fond du Lac, Wisconsin
 * Janesville, Wisconsin
 * Kenosha, Wisconsin
 * Manitowoc, Wisconsin
 * Menomonie, Wisconsin
 * Merrill, Wisconsin
 * Oshkosh, Wisconsin
 * Racine, Wisconsin
 * Sheboygan, Wisconsin
 * Stevens Point, Wisconsin
 * Tomorrow Valley Area
 * Wausau, Wisconsin
 * Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin

Each of these metropolitan/micropolitan areas only consists of a single county, so each template is redundant to the corresponding county template, which already appear side by side in most articles. The Wisconsin county templates are more complete in the listing of cities and towns, anyway. Other metro templates span multiple counties, so they actually add something to navigation, while these just add an extra navigation box without adding any extra navigation. Kennethaw88 (talk) 05:28, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete All the templates are redundant with the county templates; that should be good enough.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 03:27, 28 January 2014 (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.

Muslim scholar 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 Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 23:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Muslim scholars-01
 * Muslim scholars-02
 * Muslim scholars

First, this is nothing more than a clear POV magnet; editors adhering to different sects of Islam have often displayed a lack of objectivity when judging clerics and scholars. Secondly, there is no objective measure of what Muslim scholarship is and there is no mechanism for deciding who is included in these templates. Third, two of the templates are not present on any articles at all and one of them is only present on one article; they are unused. Fourth, they are incomplete as evidenced by the redlinks and the editor who created all three has not been active for seven years. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:07, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, impractical as sidebars, the Islamic studies scholars category includes hundreds of names.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 10:29, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Muslim scholars-01 and Muslim scholars-02 per nom, as they don't appear to have ever been a finished product. Regarding Muslim scholars, I wonder if there might be benefits in keeping the history of the template visible, under a redirect which points to a relevant template; like Islam scholars diagram?  If people see what failed last time, it may prevent similarly unsuccessful attempts at building a navbox for for such a broad set of people. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:05, 25 January 2014 (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.