Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 December 12

< December 11	December 13 >

December 12

Template:Action To Save St. John’s Hospital/meta/shortname

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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. Singu larity 06:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned and essentially useless, the color "white"

Nom, Delete // FrankB 21:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not a typing aid. –Pomte 04:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I cannot see any possible use for this template. Terraxos (talk) 05:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a... umm.... not sure how to say "useless" without being overly harsh, but... yeah. JPG-GR (talk) 07:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Also, there is no corresponding {{Action To Save St. John’s Hospital}}.--12 Noon ^2¢ 22:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Although I've been looking for a 44 keystroke shortcut for typing 'white'... SkierRMH (talk) 07:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 09:20, 14 December 2007 (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 section.

Template:Komets

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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. Singu larity 06:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template copied directly from deprecated Template:IHL, which was in turn superceded by Template:Pro hockey team. — Flibirigit (talk) 18:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Redundant, and decrecated. Reso lute 18:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant and useless. --Djsasso (talk) 18:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Resolute. JPG-GR (talk) 21:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Kaiser matias (talk) 03:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. SkierRMH (talk) 07:24, 14 December 2007 (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 section.

Shadow Yamato X

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 section.

The result of the debate was delete. Singu larity 06:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More templates that were part of the Shadow Yamato X hoax. --- RockMFR 18:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all No need for templates for a bunch of deleted articles. Amaryllis25^{"Talk to me"} 18:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all -- full of red links and broken code. JPG-GR (talk) 21:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - with the articles deleted, these could probably be speedied as housekeeping. Terraxos (talk) 05:34, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all just red links, no need to keep. SkierRMH (talk) 07:23, 14 December 2007 (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 section.

Template:Example

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 section.

The result of the debate was ... As Phirazo has pointed out, this does work when substituted, so it's not broken. However, the current links to it are, as Gavia immer has pointed out, using it as an example (like red link or foobar). The WikiProject links to it are using it in this manner, all of which seem to have been generated by Template:Task force. This template is meant to show how wiki markup works, so I'm going to move it to Template:Markup. Again, as Gavia immer has said, the incoming links show this is just being used as an example, so it seems reasonable to replace this with some sort of example. If you have any better ideas, tell me. --- RockMFR 04:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template that doesn't work according to its creator. — 67.101.5.42 (contribs) 06:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unused and broken. Mr.Z-man 16:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 18:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. JPG-GR (talk) 21:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, the template is being used by 3+ Wikiprojects groupsto manage tasking.s.a. here... a brand new working project. At most, recat, but it's really fine where it's at. Don't steal peoples tools!—it makes them cranky! // FrankB 21:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, template is used by a number of wikiprojects and does work, comments linked to by nom are very old. --Djsasso (talk) 21:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as WikiProject tool. Flibirigit (talk) 01:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm curious how this template is so highly used, but only has two transclusions, one of which is in userspace. JPG-GR (talk) 07:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I vaguely remember making this template but I really, really recall that I was copying it from somewhere and merely formalizing its existence (hence my comment on it not working despite having just made it). Looking at my edit history, however, I can't find where I might have copied it from. Regardless, it clearly does NOT work and is of no use to anyone in its current form. That said, if such a template DID work it would be of use and worth keeping. — jdorje (talk) 07:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Replace with content suitable for an example of a template (e.g., a noincluded explanation that it's an example template). Every use I've seen of the template name is just using it generically as the name of an example template, often as a demonstration of , e.g., {{tl|example}} rendering as {{example}}. None of them is using it for the purpose the template was written for, and in fact it's broken (doesn't do what it says it's supposed to do). Better to use this for what people think it's for than to keep the broken content currently in place or mangle the current uses with a redlink. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:52, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
After fiddling with the parser functions some, I'm convinced that there's no way to make it work it without installing additional MediaWiki extensions. So, delete unless someone finds a creative solution that I've overlooked (don't think there is one, but who knows). — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 09:25, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It does work if you subst: it, for some odd reason. [1] --Phirazo 03:31, 17 December 2007 (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 section.