Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 July 5



Template:Xfce and Template:LXDE

 * 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 at Templates for discussion/Log/2015 July 15. Alakzi (talk) 23:12, 14 July 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:User blocking

 * 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. Opabinia regalis (talk) 01:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Redundant to Blocked user. Alakzi (talk) 16:21, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * User blocking


 * Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:55, 6 July 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:Harvfoot

 * 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. Opabinia regalis (talk) 01:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Un-used, created for a single article, which has since seem to have started no longer relying on this methodology (at least it's usage was outputting an empty div). —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 13:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Harvfoot
 * delete, not needed. Frietjes (talk) 14:40, 7 July 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:Gray's Anatomy

 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:38, 18 July 2015 (UTC) In order that Wikipedia functions properly as a bureaucratic entity, forms must be filed in the correct places and not logically alongside the issue they relate to.
 * Gray's Anatomy

This templates stores links relating to a proposed deletion here. Tom (LT) (talk) 11:06, 5 July 2015 (UTC)


 * sigh. This is pointless. If the articles are deleted, so should the template that navigates between them. Alakzi (talk) 11:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * keep for now but ... (per User talk:Alakzi) Christian75 (talk) 16:15, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. There’s no reason to consider this template on its own merits when its merits are entirely dependent on something else. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 22:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete navigates nothing except one article68.148.186.93 (talk) 22:31, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete To be truthful I have no idea what the nom is talking about, but I should point out that Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. That aside, the navbox has a single active blue link after all the articles that it did point to have been deleted so it serves no purpose. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 08:19, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * speedy delete, now that the articles have been deleted. Frietjes (talk) 14:55, 18 July 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:Infobox communist institution

 * 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; deleted as G7 by AnomieBOT ⚡  21:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC) The original author of this template has blanked the template, and no editing since December 2014. Logical1004 (talk) 11:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Infobox communist institution
 * 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:Movedto

 * 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. Opabinia regalis (talk) 01:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Apparently has never been used in the six years it’s been around, and has only been edited once in that time. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 09:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Movedto
 * delete, not needed and redundant to Template:Moved discussion to. Frietjes (talk) 14:40, 7 July 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:Dina Rae

 * 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; deleted as G6 by AnomieBOT ⚡  18:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC) Unused navigation template. All the pages that transcluded this template have been deleted as works of User:Kandiwell, who was indef blocked as a sock of banned User:MariaJaydHicky.This template is also a work of Kandiwell. I am not clear on whether WP:G5 applies to templates; so I bring it here. —teb728 t c 08:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Dina Rae
 * delete, or even speedy delete since there is no parent article. Frietjes (talk) 14:42, 7 July 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.