Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 June 16

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 16

[edit]
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 Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/BLP Special Enforcement closed as keep. — Athaenara 18:39, 24 June 2008 (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.
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 WoohookittyWoohoo! 06:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Football lineup (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is not being used for any purpose whatsoever, and currently has no forseeable use in the future. — – PeeJay 21:00, 16 June 2008 (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.
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. Wizardman 02:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stub Category Group (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Delete. Created in 2005, used in one instance [1], but I'm not sure why. Her Pegship (tis herself) 18:14, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep, verging on weak delete, tending towards vacillation and needing to be persuaded one way or the other. I think in theory this is of some use, since it covers a particular case of {{Stub Category}}, roughly along the same lines as {{Regional stub category}}, say. But admittedly it's not in much use, it may not be necessary to cover that case (the "newstub" parameter to SC has been made optional, for reasons like this type of case), and it might even be better to use SC, but with a "bespoke" message explaining its relationship to its subcats. Bit of a toss-up, really. Alai (talk) 19:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete A stub group descending from a single article (I think) makes no sense. Unused, anyway. --Thetrick (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2008 (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.
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 Moved out of "non-free space" and redirect deleted. Happymelon 17:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed this template to include both {{PD-USGov-NASA}} and {{Insignia}}, instead of being a "non-free-logo" template, because according to the Foundation, even though there are usage restrictions, these restrictions do not fall under the Foundations definition of non-free. See email by Kat [2] which contains the quote: "Some media may be subject to restrictions other than copyright in some jurisdictions, but are still considered free work." See also discussion on non-free aspects of non-copyrighted materials here --TheDJ (talkcontribs) 14:42, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. There was a previous discussion on the template here. --TheDJ (talkcontribs) 14:44, 16 June 2008 (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.
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 Speedily deleted under CSD G6. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Test2MrB (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Obsolete personal warning system of a retired user not in use. MBisanz talk 10:27, 16 June 2008 (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.
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 Speedily deleted under CSD G6. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Drmspeedy2MrB (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Obsolete personal warning system of a retired user not in use. MBisanz talk 10:27, 16 June 2008 (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.
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 Speedily deleted under CSD G6. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:SillyMrB (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Obsolete personal warning system of a retired user. MBisanz talk 10:26, 16 June 2008 (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.
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 Speedily deleted under CSD G6. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Threat2MrB (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Obsolete personal warning system of a retired user. MBisanz talk 10:25, 16 June 2008 (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.
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 kinda sorta no consensus, but this is so obviously a duplicate of {{bv}} that I'm redirecting it there. The only difference appears to be the user talk link, and that's not something we should keep, anyway. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sobminor (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Bad template that misstates blocking policy "block without warning" and is bitey. MBisanz talk 08:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I fail to see the WP:BITE in this template. It is true, should a vandal continue to edit unconstructively, they will be blocked (albeit usually not without warning; this bit can be edited). --Mizu onna sango15/珊瑚15 00:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There are other templates conveying a similar message with a different tone. Anyone using these sort of templates should be able to decide on their own which is appropriate/bitey.ÜÖÏËÄ ÄËÏÖÜ (talk) 18:18, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete along with the personal user talk page to which people are directed if they wish to complain about the vandalism tagging. The user last made a single edit in October 2007, but had otherwise been inactive since December 2006. Better to get rid of this than have someone else decide to start using it and directing editors to an unmonitored page if they have concerns. Risker (talk) 21:18, 23 June 2008 (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.
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. Wizardman 02:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Funnybut (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Another "joke" template that fails to communicate the serious nature of violating policy. MBisanz talk 08:03, 16 June 2008 (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.
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 Withdrawn, KT makes a good point. MBisanz talk 17:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Behave (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Joke template that fails to link to policy or state the gravity of making "joke" edits. MBisanz talk 08:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I use this template occassionally when I see an anon editor make a witty test edit. This template serves a purpose. It should probably be improved to include links to policies. Kingturtle (talk) 11:53, 16 June 2008 (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.