Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 June 11

< June 10	June 12 >

June 11, 2006

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 Delete -- Drini 22:30, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Olympic Games Tobogganing

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Template:Olympic Games Tobogganing, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at [[Talk:Template:Olympic Games Tobogganing]]. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. {{Template:Olympic Games Tobogganing}}

Reason for proposal is to the fact that tobogganing is used for both {{Olympic Games Skeleton}} and {{Olympic Games Luge}}, and each have their own seperate templates that are just as effective on accessing their respective links rather than having to go through the tobogganing link. Chris 20:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chris 22:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - covered by the more modern and more comprehensive name of Skeleton. Not needed at all, some redirects might be useful, but no need at all for this Template. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:03, 12 June 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.

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 move and keep. Pagra shtak 04:56, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:More

Template:More (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Un-necessary with templates like {{main}}, {{further}} and {{see also}}. It is also inconsistent to highlight the politics series alone.cj | talk 05:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot see why it is inconsistent. The section is about politics of the country. The series gives the more indepth information. One could do that with other sections in the country articles, but there are not many series like the politics series per country. I wouldn't mind if there would be a morehistory template to. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 10:56, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COMMENT: This template has already been moved to {{Morepolitics}}

Delete, the name is also quite misleading since something as generic as "more" might be expected to have more universal use than just politics. -- Bovineone 06:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but prepared to rename it in morepolitics. The template is used to link the section in the country article to the more comprehensive information that can be found in the series. Putting the series box in each copuntry article is overdone, this is a small template giving entry to much more rlevenat information on the issue. I will start replacing the more template with the morepolitics template. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 08:23, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Template:Morepolitics for clarity. This is a useful template, that has a poor name choice.--SomeStranger^(t|c) 11:20, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Move per SomeStranger. --Coredesat 12:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I created the Template Morepolitics today and replaced more with it in every country file with the exception of the protected Kosovo page. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 21:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - That doesn't address the inconsistency. This template is simply frivolous.--cj | talk 05:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with already performed move, this template is useful --Deville (Talk) 23:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Has been moved, keep. —Nightst a llion (?) 13:00, 13 June 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.

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 no consensus to delete Pagra shtak 04:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Speedy-image-c

Template:Speedy-image-c (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Not a useful template - No speedy deletion would take days to complete. In any case where deletions would take days, it's listed in ifd, not speedy. --Hunter 03:36, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, useless template. --Coredesat 03:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. " No speedy deletion would take days to complete. " - No, it takes seven day for image speedy to be completed (see template:no licence). There are tags for speedy deletion of articles and categories, in order to notify readers. It is a useful process for public scrutinisation to ensure nothing is wrongly speedied. This template is useful to tell readers that certain images are going to be speedied. User:Carnildo, who operates user:OrphanBot, said there are technical reasons the template can't be applied automatically be user:OrphanBot [1]. As a result user:OrphanBot has kept hiding tagged images from articles with  (e.g. " [[image:something.jpg|20px|caption]] " would be turned "  "). A similar template, {{ifdc}}, has popularly been used, since that's not affected by technical difficulties bots face. — Insta ntnood 06:24, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, keep per Insta. --Coredesat 07:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - That is not a speedy deletion tag. Speedy deletion is the one start with {{db}}, e.g. {{db-i1}}. No license tag signals the speedy deletion may take place after seven days only. Also, all process involve with {{no source}} and {{no license}} are automated by OrphanBot after the images are tagged with such tag, and Orphanbot doesn't use such tag. Btw, the usual practice is the image is not deleted after seven days, rather, Orphanbot will remove all the linkages and notify the uploader that the image can be a speedy candidate. Images won't be deleted immediately after seven days, but rather, a couple days later. In any case, all processes are automated by Orphanbot, both notification and orphaning. (See Category:Images with unknown copyright status for examples) Furthermore, in most cases only the uploader can tell how to tag the imgaes, and the uploader is notified from the beginning. --Hunter 07:26, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It can be tagged on inappropriate pictures. Anonymous _anonymous_Have a Nice Day 11:48, 11 June 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.

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 Delete Unused and redundant -- Drini 23:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Exams2

Delete per nom. Mr. Le fty _{Talk to me!} 01:53, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Coredesat 03:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per nom. Anonymous _anonymous_Have a Nice Day 11:49, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Grand master ka 05:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 17:34, 12 June 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.