Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 May 18

< May 17	May 19 >

May 18

Template:Celia

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 Keep Happy‑melon 19:54, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary template for series of books with few created articles. Almost entirely red links and suspect almost entire listed links would be unable to pass notability requirements. Collectonian (talk) 22:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And why should they not pass notability requirements? Is there a policy against foreign classics now, too? My. How Wikipedia has changed in two months. There are plenty of red links now, due to the fact that I can't get a hold of all the books, because they're expensive, but articles were to be made until Wikipedia policies banned non-English-language foreign classics. Shame. T.W. (talk) 01:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The template is completely unnecessary, particularly when its almost all redlinks. There are only 3 actual articles for Celia, so adding this huge, red-linked filled template does not enhance them at all. The discussion of the two articles at AfD is another issue. Collectonian (talk) 01:32, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. If the other articles are created, this template will be useful and is in line with other navigational boxes. I will (of course) change my opinion if the AfD for these articles closes as delete. --Kildor (talk) 07:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (though possibly trim down). It makes sense to link together the existing articles in this series; I'm ambivalent about including the redlinked ones, but as the AFD discussions have found that these books pass notability requirements, there's no reason they couldn't be written in future. Either way, this is a useful template. Terraxos (talk) 23:11, 27 May 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.

Template:Hollyoaks 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 section.

The result of the debate was Delete Happy‑melon 19:56, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The template provides no extra features over and above those already provided by {{Infobox character}}. I'd like to suggest that this template is either deleted or made to redirect to {{Infobox character}}. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 10:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Infobox soap character}} is more appropriate for these characters. I already started converting some parameters to make things easier. I am replacing "mother" and "father" options with "parents". I would like help to change "brothers" and "sisters" with "siblings" and "sons" and "daughters" with "children". Let's first make the options compatible and then check if we can just replace it with Infobox soap character. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, I'll see what I can do :). ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 10:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Finished with replacements. They were many duplicates. Now, it's obvious that the template can be replaced. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible to just redirect the Hollyoaks template to Soap character? Would that work? ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 12:20, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just replaced most of the parameters with the corresponded ones in the infobox soap character. I still can't fix "years", "spin-offs" and "books". Unless we believe this are not necessary to exist. After replacements we can just replace "Hollyoaks character" with "Infobox soap character". -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(out) Great work Magioladitis. "years" is effectively a merged form of "first" and "last". I don't think "spin-offs" and "books" are particularly necessary - very few current characters have any "hang over" into spinoffs or books. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 07:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note to admin. ~~Please don't delete template until it's orphan. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)~~ Template is orphan since now. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Orphaned and redundant to the more general infoboxes linked above. Terraxos (talk) 23:09, 27 May 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.

Template:British politics

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 07:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Useless as the expanding box does not contain anything, and there has been only one edit, so there never was anything there. Redundant to {{British political parties}}. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 09:45, May 18, 2008 (UTC)

Delete Completely useless. There's nothing inside the hidden template to start with. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 21:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would guess that this is a work-in-progress that was abandoned or forgotten by its creator. In any case, delete as redundant to {{British political parties}}. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 23:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No content and even if it did would be redundant. --Tombomp (talk) 08:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is nothing in this template, useless. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie ^{( talk / contribs)} 01:20, 21 May 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.

Template:Bre Banca Lannutti Cuneo

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 Woohookitty^Woohoo! 08:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template consists only of a link to the Bre Banca Lannutti Cuneo article due to the non-free image being removed. Orphaned.. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 09:42, May 18, 2008 (UTC)

Delete Orphaned and not useful for navigation as it contains only one link. Maralia (talk) 01:38, 20 May 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.

Template:Bhakti TV - LIVE

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 Woohookitty^Woohoo! 08:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template consists entirely of BHAKTITV-LIVE. Prose should not really be in Template: space, especially when it is so trivial to add to articles. It takes more characters to type {{Bhakti TV - LIVE}} than what the template contains.. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 09:38, May 18, 2008 (UTC)

Delete Heh, it actually does take more time to type the template than its contents. Completely useless. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 21:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – as per above. Jared Preston (talk) 12:07, 24 May 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.

Template:BW21

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 06:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template consists of an image hyperlinked to a User talk page. Such templates cannot be used in signatures per WP:SIG, and it has no use elsewhere. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 09:29, May 18, 2008 (UTC)

Weak delete Per Transclusions of templates and parser functions in signatures (like those which appear as User:Name/sig, for example) are forbidden. in WP:SIG. There are few if any pages which link to it, so I have no cencerns about messing up talk pages or such. Although, I can't be certain that there is in fact no other use for it. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 21:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Violation of WP:SIG and an improper use of template-space. Mr.Z-man 08:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, violates WP:SIG, no other uses. Terraxos (talk) 23:08, 27 May 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.

Template:Arkas Spor Izmir

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 Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template consists only of a link to the Arkas Spor Izmir article since the non-free image that used to be there has been deleted. Redundant and useless.. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 09:25, May 18, 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nom - useless template. Terraxos (talk) 01:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – as per nom. Jared Preston (talk) 12:08, 24 May 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.

Template:Allan De Genova

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 Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unused template consisting of some 'references' in a list _{the 'references' are simply links University/sporting websites}. I fail to see how this would be useful, or which articles it would be useful in. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 09:18, May 18, 2008 (UTC)

Delete, what in the world is this supposed to be for? I see no usefulness in this template. --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 04:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – as per above. Jared Preston (talk) 12:09, 24 May 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.

Template:IQ and the Wealth of Nations

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 Woohookitty^Woohoo! 10:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This template is not used. It was originally created [1] with the intention of monitoring vandalism. However, Wikipedia:Template namespace states that "Templates should not masquerade as article content in the main article namespace; instead, place the text directly into the article." It appears that the template was removed with this edit and has not been used for over a year. — Khatru2 (talk) 03:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The template has since been updated, making this version redundant. It contained info [IQ scores for 2006] that were not in the book, and it was edited to fix this. Orphaned, can only be used in one article and unlikely to be used again. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 08:41, May 18, 2008 (UTC)

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.