Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 May 4



Template:Unonopsis

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G6 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:02, 12 May 2016 (UTC) Neelix template that only links three pages. Not very useful and the pages are already linked in the parent article. Legacypac (talk) 08:41, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Unonopsis
 * Support deletion; these templates with lists of species are unhelpful. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:19, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Unhelpful. It's not a complete list of the species in the genus, and if it were complete it would be a sea of red links. Plantdrew (talk) 15:22, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * delete per nom. Frietjes (talk) 17:01, 11 May 2016 (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).

Template:Akrosida

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted as G6 by AnomieBOT ⚡  01:02, 12 May 2016 (UTC) Neelix template that only links two pages. Not very useful. Legacypac (talk) 08:39, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Akrosida
 * Support deletion as for all such templates of species lists. Unhelpful; unreferenced (and not able to be referenced); redundant. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:20, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Not useful. People are more likely to click through to the genus link in the taxbox to find other species in the genus. Plantdrew (talk) 15:22, 5 May 2016 (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).

Template:California Interstate Highways

 * 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).

The result of the discussion was delete after ensuring all articles are within Category:Interstate Highways in California. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 06:14, 12 May 2016 (UTC) Redundant to both List of Interstate Highways in California and Category:Interstate Highways in California. Per past precedents, the existence of a list and a category has been deemed to negate the need for the navbox. Such discussions include: Templates for discussion/Log/2012 January 21, Templates for discussion/Log/2012 July 6, Templates for discussion/Log/2014 May 16.  Imzadi 1979  →   05:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * California Interstate Highways
 * Delete - Per past precedent.  Dough   4872   10:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per consensus precedent and template guidelines. Regards, James (talk/contribs) 20:32, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Ummmm.... I'd say we'd keep it for a while, but when the time has come, it should be deleted. Kevon kevono (talk) 21:14, 4 May 2016 (UTC) (What the hell is UTC?) 14:13 (PT)
 * How long is "a while" and why hasn't "the time come" now, ?  Imzadi 1979  →   08:46, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per past precedents cited. Infoboxes on all articles link to the list, and categories are also available for navigation. --  LJ  ↗  14:11, 10 May 2016 (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).