Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 October 6

< October 5	October 7 >

October 6

Template:Minor league team

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. — Malcolm (talk) 23:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The template is redundant to another better-designed template (Template:MiLB_infobox). Also, the template is not used on any articles. Reccomendation: deletionNatureBoyMD 22:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Rocket000 22:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - same reason. jj137 (Talk) 02:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as obsolete. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:05, 8 October 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:BRPortal

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. — Malcolm (talk) 23:57, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template that is linked to a redirect. — Jorvik 21:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Rocket000 22:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as obsolete. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:06, 8 October 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:Chembox beta

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. — Malcolm (talk) 23:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

superseded by {{Chembox new}}. — DoSiDo 19:07, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as obsolete. Chembox folks, please create beta versions at subpages of Template:Chembox new and speedy them as they become obsolete (and why is it called that instead of simply Template:Chembox? Sounds like a merge is in order). — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:07, 8 October 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:PubChemRow

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. — Malcolm (talk) 00:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Old, unused template and, its functionality is included in {{Chembox new}}. — DoSiDo 18:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as obsolete. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:07, 8 October 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:Testg1

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. — Malcolm (talk) 00:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

per Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings/Overview. AF US CO 18:28, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as obsolete. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:07, 8 October 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:Article deletion

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. — Malcolm (talk) 00:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary template created by newbie.. Pascal.Tesson 17:32, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to {{AfD}}, an appropriate alias for it. Gracenotes^T § 18:25, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I was first thinking of redirect, but I figured it wasn't used much. Rather delete it. --Hirohisat ^紅葉 19:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Too many redirects. Rocket000 22:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Nah. Redirects are cheap :) Gracenotes^T § 17:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not so much in the template namespace. The less redirects the better. You don't want to use up all the good names with redirects. Changing a redirect (that's actually used) to a brand new template, causes lots of problems. People grow accustom to using certain redirects. And think about all the pages that transclude it. It's similar to links in the article namespace, but this is something we can avoid (since we make up the names) Rocket000 07:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Conversely, redirects can serve as placeholders. Having a redirect at Template:Article deletion will prevent someone from making a duplicate of {{AfD}} at that spot. (This argument applies more strongly to articles, though, since a template can have any given function.) For derivative templates, redirects also preserve history more clearly than a history merge. I am aware of the problems that exist with changing the target of a template redirect. But, redirecting in this case is not strictly necessary, so outright deletion works too. Gracenotes^T § 14:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Yes, I agree with the placeholder idea (like as with the name of this temp.). To further demonstrate my point, just today, I was going to create a template that displays a given template (for demonstration/example use) without adding the page to any categories. To follow the naming conventions set by other related templates, I wanted to name it {{te}}. (template example), but of course this perfect and short name was already taken. By a redirect. Now if I use this name, I have other things to deal with. Rocket000 02:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — redirects in the template namespace are sloppy and confusing. Andrwsc 18:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Andrwsc & Rocket000; template redirs are generally a Bad Thing. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:09, 8 October 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:Infobox Country at the Olympics

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. matt br 09:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unused fork of Template:Infobox Country Olympics. As discussed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics some time ago, this variant is no longer needed. Andrwsc 17:26, 6 October 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:Blankown

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. matt br 09:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

per Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings/Overview. AF US CO 17:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the same reasons that {{wr}} was deleted (previous DRv); at that time, general admin opinion seemed to be that templates similar to this one did not reflect policy, and I haven't seen any evidence that it's changed since. --ais523 17:33, 6 October 2007 (U T C)
Delete as house-keeping, since similar variants have also been deleted (see WP:UW/FAQ, a page I had wrote several months ago) Gracenotes^T § 18:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unnecessary. Isopropyl 01:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as obsolete. Any vandalizing noob who deletes warnings and stuff from their own talk page will probably find them restored by other users into an archive page out of edit history, and most such noobs are not experienced enough to know that they can have the archive page deleted. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:16, 8 October 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:BSe

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. matt br 09:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant and unused. — Meddlin' Pedant 16:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Query: What is it redundant to? Gracenotes^T § 18:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep? This appears to be part of a series of railway micro-templates, such as Template:BS2, etc. See some of the more complex templates in the userspace sandboxes that show up in this template's "What links here" page to see what it does. I ask along with Gracenotes what the replacement template is. If there isn't one, then keep unless/until a stronger rationale is presented for deletion. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 13:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The replacement is Template:BS, Template:BS2, Template:BS3, Template:BS4 or Template:BS5 depending on the number of columns required. These form part of a set. There are no corresponding BSe2, BSe3, BSe4 and BSe5 templates. There is no need because the first set can be used to produce the same output. The explanation of this can be found here on the project page and I left a note here on the talk page more than a fortnight ago. The only respondent so far agreed to the deletion. Retaining it can only add to the confusion over the templates.Meddlin' Pedant 20:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As i understand the it, being somewhat involved in WP:TRAIL. Since its intitally copy over from the german wikipedia, the code of the template has advanced, so you can use BS, BS2, BS3, BS4 and BS5 interchangably rather - each icon can be prefixed by "e" thus doing the job of the BSe template. hopefully by checking transclusions of BSe, any mainspace templates can be upgraded to the latest verions of WP:TRAIL - thus BSe has been supercede by advances in code in the others. Pickle 20:29, 9 October 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.