Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 March 21

< March 20	March 22 >

March 21, 2006

Template:Infobox-BridgeSpecificWithMap

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The result of the debate was delete as unused and superseded by {{Infobox Bridge}}. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 00:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox-BridgeSpecificWithMap (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Unused, appears to have been rendered redundant by {{Infobox Bridge}}. Is it possible to also discuss {{Bridge3B}} which REDIRECTs to it and is also unused? Phil | Talk 17:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete redundant --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 18:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, I deleted the unused redirect to this. gren グレン 02:48, 3 April 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:ST character

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 speedy redirect

Delete or Redirect to the new template. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 15:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Actualy, I'll be bold and make it a redirect. No need to vote for the obvious. The template is obviously useless as a better newer versison exist. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 13:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Cool cat --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 15:50, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Speedy) delete per nominator; it is also unlinked to any articles ... so parting with it shouldn't be problematic. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 18:33, 21 March 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:See also

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 speedy keep Wikipedia:Section

If a template is part of (the functioning of) a Wikipedia policy or guideline, the template cannot be listed for deletion on TfD separately, the template should be discussed where the discussion for that guideline is taking place.

--William Allen Simpson 11:59, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:See also (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The template offers no advantage over the manual adding of a "see also" section, and serves only to make editing difficult for many users. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. I have no idea what you're trying to say. The template handles formatting, and just like {{main}} it should remain. It is important that such formatting be handled consistently throughout wikipedia, and very bad that such a common template is being "broken" by adding {{tfd}} to it. — jdorje (talk)

Fixed, I've moved the {{Tfd}} behind <noinclude>. Omniplex 11:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I agree with jdorje. --Panairjdde 09:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I agree with jdorje regarding how formatting be handled consistently throughout Wikipedia. If users don't want to use the template, they can still do it manually. —RJN 09:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The formatting, such as the indent, italic and such, require this. Also, if you look at "What links here" on the template, you'll see that many, many pages use this template, so deleting it will add to problems rather that solve anything like space issues. Also note that the template allows the user to go to an article that is specific to the section that has this template, something that a "See also" subject can't truly accomplish (without breaking the style guide). --Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 10:02, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Gentgeen 11:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep. Strangest nomination I have seen yet. To suggest that the template makes editing more difficult is laughable. The {{tfd}} tag should be removed from the template ASAP. ◄§ĉҺɑʀκs ► 11:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. At least 2,000 direct and indirect inclusions. Maybe deprecate it in favour of {{Further}}, the code is odd. Omniplex 11:41, 21 March 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:PhoneAreaCodes

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 replace with {{Area Code Box 0}} series of templates and delete. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 00:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Area Code Box 0 and others like {{Area Code Box "n"}} are better and more specific than this. This template is possibly useless to articles about area codes. Gh87 00:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The one you mentioned is much better. If deletion is agreed upon, I'll gladly help in moving the articles over to the new template. sikander 03:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, I too can help out --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 15:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Khoikhoi 05:16, 26 March 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.