Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 October 31



Template:The Breton Sound

 * 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. (non-admin closure) Nihlus  00:24, 8 November 2017 (UTC) With two existing links already connected within those articles themselves, there is no need for this navigation box. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 22:03, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The Breton Sound
 * Delete – no navigational benefit. Articles on their EPs which it apparently links to don't actually exist, links point to wrong targets. Jellyman (talk) 13:56, 1 November 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).

Template:Dark Enlightenment sidebar

 * 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. Speedy Deleted per CSD G5. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2017 (UTC) Created by a sockpuppet. The template largely throws together tangentially-related terms to promote the idea that they are related to Dark Enlightenment. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 04:07, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Dark Enlightenment sidebar
 * Keep Generally I think that block evasion needs to be discouraged through the reverting and deletion of material added by socks. However this particular sock was quite prolific and what work I saw, notably at Dark Enlightenment appears to have been overwhelmingly constructive. There is currently a talk page discussion going on there as to what course of action to take. As for the template, while it is somewhat limited for a sidebar template, I believe the representations of the linked names and themes are essentially accurate. The only real issue is that the article has become overly dependent on primary sources, which again, is being addressed in the talk page discussion. For now I think we should proceed cautiously and refrain from knee jerk deletions/reversions. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:48, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The problem is that a good number of the related things aren't that related (Seasteading), and I'm not sure Peter Thiel would support his inclusion here. I'm not sure any of the links other than Nick Land and Curtis Yarvin are relevant enough to be in an infobox on the Dark Enlightenment / Neo-Reactionism. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 05:02, 31 October 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).

Template:Southern nationalism sidebar

 * 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 G5 by AnomieBOT ⚡  17:08, 2 November 2017 (UTC) Created by a sockpuppet. The template largely throws together tangentially-related terms to promote the idea that they are related. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 03:58, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Southern nationalism sidebar
 * Keep The template covers the Neo-Confederate political ideology. Dimadick (talk) 09:24, 2 November 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).

Template:Duffer Brothers

 * 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. (non-admin closure) Nihlus  00:26, 8 November 2017 (UTC) Navigates too little content. If there are five or six entries, it would be different. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:15, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Duffer Brothers
 * Delete per nom, no navigational benefit. May be useful in future when they will presumably do further projects, but not at present. Jellyman (talk) 13:58, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- three links is not enough to necessitate a navbox. - Iago Qnsi (talk) 19:08, 3 November 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).