Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 August 1



Template:Infobox compressed hydrogen

 * 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 replace and delete. Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC) Single-use infobox, can simply be substituted and deleted. Alakzi (talk) 11:22, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Infobox compressed hydrogen
 *  Subst then delete per nom. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:40, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * do not subst this does not use a infobox; it uses direct table coding, instead replace with a better template, preferably some iteration of infobox that can be used in multiple articles instead of direct use of infobox -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 06:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Replace then delete per .190 Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:09, 2 August 2015 (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:Top 10 current ODI Batsmen based on average

 * 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. (nac) Alakzi (talk) 09:23, 10 August 2015 (UTC) Recently created template that is completely redundant given the long-standing presence of the much better and more comprehensive Template:Batsmen with a ODI batting average above 40. StAnselm (talk) 02:24, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Top 10 current ODI Batsmen based on average
 * Delete because redundant. 117.192.185.184 (talk) 08:04, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Redundant, unencyclopedic and also pretty much impossible to maintain. Johnlp (talk) 08:22, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:LISTCRUFT, no encyclopedic value. Also, "current" is badly defined (does someone who hasn't played for 6 months count as current or not). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete because its a list an will change time to time.srini (talk) 09:58, 8 August 2015 (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:Star Trek films

 * 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. (nac) Alakzi (talk) 09:19, 10 August 2015 (UTC) Delete as redundant to Star Trek which includes all the links and is already on all articles using Star Trek films. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:11, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Star Trek films
 * Redirect to Star Trek -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 07:19, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirecting is OK but we would still have to remove all current uses to avoid displaying Star Trek twice. The "films" name will be misleading when Star Trek includes all media. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:29, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:41, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator....William 22:50, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and assimilate by Borg for obvious reasons. —  NickTheRed37 (0x54 &middot; 0x43) 17:55, 3 August 2015 (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.