Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 March 31



Template:Paris bridge

 * 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) 06:42, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Paris bridge

This is a nonstandard port of a template from the French WP. We don't use templates like this to track locations on en-WP. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 12:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Infobox bridge already has parameters to indicate the next upstream and downstream crossings. And this is just a succession box. --- 70.24.250.235 (talk) 08:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete redundant with the succession box, and duplicative of the functionality found in the bridge infobox -- 70.24.250.235 (talk) 08:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per IP —PC-XT+ 08:56, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * delete after merging any succession information with the infobox. Frietjes (talk) 22:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, we should add the succession information to the infobox, instead. —PC-XT+ 09:20, 4 April 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:Karateka

 * 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) 06:32, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Karateka

WP:NENAN. Indiscriminate collection of links. Yes, they are all karate practitioners, but there's no inclusion criteria at all, and there's nothing to indicate why these individuals belong in the navbox and not others. Better as a category. oknazevad (talk) 03:16, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * This one bothered me for quite a while also. Very indiscriminate and no aid to navigation.  I would not be upset if it was deleted.Peter Rehse (talk) 12:49, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree that it would be better as a category. jmcw (talk) 21:32, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * delete, better as a category. Frietjes (talk) 22:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Already a category.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:20, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per above —PC-XT+ 09:22, 4 April 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.