Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 July 3



Template:HTML element

 * 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 deleted by User:Fastily. Primefac (talk) 02:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC) Unused, not clearly explained how to use it. &mdash;SamB (talk) 20:33, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * HTML element
 * move to userspace. Frietjes (talk) 13:14, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete It’s unused, no clear directions, creating user is inactive. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:30, 6 July 2018 (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:OldcsdRescued

 * 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. No opposition. Primefac (talk) 02:59, 12 July 2018 (UTC) Barely used, (one 1 talk page, by its creator) and I believe it has several flaws.
 * OldcsdRescued


 * Any experienced admin has seen someone “rescue” a deleted article, only to make a new article that still shouldn’t be here
 * Seems to suggest a policy that does not exist, that an article can’t be deleted twice under the same criterion if someone plants their flag on it and says “look at me, I rescued this”
 * ”Names and shames” deleting admin. Not that they’ve done anything to be ashamed of, but I’ve never seen that in such a template before and it seems overly personal and vindictive.

In short, this seems to have been created to claim victory in the great battle over notability rather than serving a legitimate, policy based purpose. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:25, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * delete per nom. Frietjes (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2018 (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:Ron Kenoly

 * 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. No opposition. Primefac (talk) 03:01, 12 July 2018 (UTC) There were six links other than the subject's article. The five albums were redirected as non-notable and the other entry doesn't mention the subject. No navigation required. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:19, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Ron Kenoly
 * Delete per nom. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:03, 9 July 2018 (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).

Stagecoach Eastbourne bus routes

 * 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 - F ASTILY   01:11, 12 July 2018 (UTC) All unused. Non notable bus routes (and unlikely to ever be). Ajf773 (talk) 10:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Stagecoach Eastbourne route The Loop
 * Stagecoach Eastbourne route 251 252
 * Stagecoach Eastbourne route 1
 * Stagecoach Eastbourne route 3
 * Stagecoach Eastbourne route 5
 * Stagecoach Eastbourne route 51
 * Stagecoach Eastbourne route 54
 * Stagecoach Eastbourne route 55
 * Stagecoach Eastbourne route 56
 * delete per nom. Frietjes (talk) 13:54, 6 July 2018 (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:London Buses route layout

 * 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 deleted by User:Fastily. Primefac (talk) 02:56, 12 July 2018 (UTC) Not used in any articles, redundant and we don't generally list every stop for bus routes. Ajf773 (talk) 09:40, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * London Buses route layout
 * delete per nom. with the individual bus route articles being redirected, we don't need this. Frietjes (talk) 13:53, 6 July 2018 (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:Greatest Hits (Westlife album) tracks

 * 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. Primefac (talk) 02:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC) There is no need nor precedent to have a track listing for every album a song appears on within the infobox of the articles of those songs. Just think if someone tried to do this for songs by the Who or the Beach Boys.
 * Greatest Hits (Westlife album) tracks
 * Unbreakable - The Greatest Hits Volume 1 tracks

There can be some justification for such templates for the original album but it is excessive to include compilations. Such navigation is better provided by Westlife singles. Someone interested in the tracklisting can just go to those album pages rather than clutter up infoboxes with multiple templates such as these. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 00:28, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * delete, doubly bad idea for compilation albums. Frietjes (talk) 13:15, 6 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Track listings for later album appearances shouldn't be added to infoboxes, because they often overload the boxes with miscellaneous infomation. BTW, it's been tried for some Beach Boy's songs. —Ojorojo (talk) 20:58, 9 July 2018 (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).