Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 August 20



Template:Dogfish-stub

 * 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. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 19:13, 27 August 2017 (UTC) unused low quality template The Banner talk 13:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Dogfish-stub
 * Delete Unnecessary per nom. (Category does not exist). Eagleash (talk) 13:13, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep You know shark stub it's not actually apporiate for dogfish, did you take a look at population? There are about 4 article where they are stub — Preceding unsigned comment added by Builder8360 (talk • contribs) 13:23, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Aha, emergency additions after the nomination. but still they are all sharks. The Banner talk 14:26, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete- As far as I can tell, there are only a few species of dog fish extant. Further, there is no reason to have oddly specific stub cats. It would fit under shark (per nom) or, I suppose fish, or aquatic species or something of that sort. This template does not 'help' WP any more than alternatives, though I know it was made in good faith and I wouldn't say it's 'low quality'. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  02:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I called it low quality because this short template links to a disambiguation page and to a non-existing category. The Banner talk 09:31, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Was not proposed at WP:WSS/P; and even if it had been, it would not have been approved since there are fewer than 60 qualifying articles. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 20:04, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete!--AlfaRocket (talk) 20:36, 21 August 2017 (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).