Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 August 14

< August 13	August 15 >

August 14

Template:Danish Cities

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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. ЯyanG e rbil10(The people rejoice!) 01:07, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This template is now redundant due to the creation of the better named Template:25 biggest cities of Denmark. I have updated the affected articles. Valentinian ^(talk) 20:23, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as redundant to the new template. Neil916 00:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant to newer temp. —dima ^/talk/ 00:18, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Sophy's Duckling 08:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 page.

Template:British dependencies arms

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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. ЯyanG e rbil10(The people rejoice!) 01:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This template is now redundant after the expansion of Template:British coat of arms. - Bob 14:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. JPD (talk) 17:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- makes more sense to have 2 templates, rather than one large ugly one. Astrotrain 21:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why? There is no logical reason for that statement. --Bob 00:06, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. —dima ^/talk/ 00:19, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because it's superfluous & there's nothing especially ugly about the bigger one. Sophy's Duckling 08:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 page.

Template:User Discussion Closed

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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. ЯyanG e rbil10(The people rejoice!) 01:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This template has been created by User:Unisouth, and is used solely by him on his talk page, where he replaces uses it to replace old discussions. Having it may encourage users to remove content from their talk pages, which is generally seen as a Bad Idea. RFBailey 12:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Doesn't seem to serve any helpful purpose. JPD (talk) 17:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I could see this being used in a polemic way, and I cannot see it being used in a helpful way. --M @r ē ino 22:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.
Delete per nom. Æon ^{Insane Ward} 18:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Barry Salter 07:53, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Sophy's Duckling 08:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 page.

Template:Incubator

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 page.

The result of the debate was to keep. ЯyanG e rbil10(The people rejoice!) 01:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This template is an unnecessary self-reference. While I think it is ok to link to other Wikipedias in this fashion ({{InterWiki}}), linking to an in-development project with no infrastructure of its own seems of very little use to the end-user. Jon Harald Søby 08:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There doesnt' seem to be a problem with this to me. JPD (talk) 17:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is the exact equivalent of linking to the French/Japanese/etc Wikipedia, except that the language in question has a very small Wikipedia right now, AKA the "incubator" stage. --M @r ē ino 22:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Reasons:

Keeping the template promotes the incubator project. A lot of people do not know about incubator project.

There are number of people who can aid the development of the test wikipedia in new language but do not know about its existence. This template in the article surely helps them.

Not all incubators are in that rudimentary form. There are some incubators with more articles (and hence more informative to end user) than a number of Wikipedias of some languages.

--Eukesh 15:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it for the same reasons as Eukesh.--Daraheni 15:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Mareino and Eukesh. User:Angr 12:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good arguments for keeping the incubator template going, I agree. ilvi 22:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. --Timichal 00:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Eukesh. Sophy's Duckling 08:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm starting a new Wikipedia myself in Chavacano. The incubator template actually informs readers who read the Chavacano article that there is a Chavacano Wikipedia being tested and started. It also helps me locate speakers and writers of this language who could contribute in writing, editing, and developing the new Wikipedia. --Weekeejames 19:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 page.