Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 May 27

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 27

[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 delete WoohookittyWoohoo! 08:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fraternity Leadership Association (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Non-notable organization, template is not useful for navigation. Should be deleted and all reference to it removed in articles. --Explodicle (talk) 18:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I agree with the nominator's rationale. Navigation boxes should at least provide some useful navigation between article, but I don't think this one does that. The organization isn't particularly notable, so I don't even think using a category would be useful here either. --CapitalR (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per nom, the main article was deleted In July 07 WikiZorrosign 13:36, 28 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.
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! 08:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1968 Detroit Tigers roster (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

A team sports roster does not really apply to a single season. The roster changes throughout the season and there it doesn't make sense to take a "snapshot" of it during the season or at the end of the season. The information about what players that were on a team is better represented with individual player statistics. Also, this template is incomplete. — X96lee15 (talk) 15:52, 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.
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! 08:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lincoln 1970 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This timeline template is unneeded when Template:Lincoln vehicles already covers 1970 to present. — Vossanova o< 14:28, 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.
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 Happymelon 14:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Page d (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Template is intended for mainspace edits but is only of interest to editors. Linking to explicit disambiguation page redirects is a better solution. At minimum the template should not produce any visible content on the pages that use it, preferably IMO the template should be deleted. — Taemyr (talk) 12:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The function of the template is to make it explicit that links to disambiguation pages is intended to be such, and to make semi-automatic tools such as Wikipedia Cleaner ignore these links. Taemyr (talk) 22:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If it's a big known problem (I haven't looked into it so I don't know) that people are constantly changing links to disambig pages into direct article links with automated tools then it's possible it should stay and be modified to remove the icon as PamD suggests above. It would be better though if people using Wikipedia Cleaner (or any automated tool) need to be aware (and I'm sure they are) that some disambig links need to stay as disambig links rather than be converted to direct article links. Creating a template that alters the links so that Wikipedia Cleaner can't read them to avoid some problem isn't a good idea - to a certain degree it's removing those links (if that's the purpose of the template) from editorial scrutiny by people that use those tools. In other words, if someone is using a semi automated tool to correct links, they should be able to make the judgement decision that some links should be disambig links rather than article links, or they shouldn't be using the tool (or the tool should have documentation that tells them). Essentially this template says "I want this link to point to a disambig page and I want to make that very clear" but just creating a normal link to a disambig page does exactly the same thing. If the template is saying "I want this link to point to a disambig page and I don't want you to change it if you're using an automated tool so I'm hiding it from you" then it's a bad template. Ha! (talk) 11:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably not a big problem, as almost all links to a dab page should be changed to link an article. And there is better solutions for making the link an explicit dab link, eg. linking by way of an rd. Taemyr (talk) 19:35, 30 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.
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 - use {{current spaceflight|mission=yes}} instead. Happymelon 15:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Current mars lander mission (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Way too narrow in scope. The one article that has this should just have the {{Current spaceflight}} tag. If there is agreement on this, and this template is deleted, someone should update the Phoenix (spacecraft) article to use the aforementioned template instead. -Lilac Soul (talk contribs count) 09:18, 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.
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 (WP:CSD#G4: recreation of {{Tagalog Wikipedia}} (Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 May 12#Template:Tagalog Wikipedia)). Happymelon 14:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tagalog (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Duplicates interwiki sidebar functionality. --- RockMFR 03:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Wikipedia (English) is the 7th most visited website in the Philippines. Many topics here have a tagalog version, but many don't see the link in the sidebar. Also, some articles in the Tagalog Wikipedia does not exist here or has only stub counterparts. That's why this template was created. Dar book (talk) 05:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – as per nom. Superfluous. Jared Preston (talk) 10:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - only used in a few articles (which already have the interwiki added) and has limited scope for use. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 17:09, May 27, 2008 (UTC)
  • Moderate delete Redundant to the sidebar, rarely used. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Was there some other recent discussion about this or a similar template? I'm certain there was, and that it was specifically about the Tagalog Wikipedia. It doesn't really matter, but I just got a weird deja vu feeling when I first noticed this TfD listing the other day. -- Ned Scott 05:10, 1 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.

Template:Democrat

[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 Speedy keep (not that speedy I know, but the point stands :D): wrong forum, but more importantly, updating all the pages needed to merge these templates would consume more resources than leaving them be. Happymelon 14:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michaelbeckham/Dem (talk · contribs)
StuffOfInterest/Userboxes/User democrat (talk · contribs)

are duplicates of

QzDaddy/dem (talk · contribs)

They should all be merged. 151.197.123.128 (talk) 05:09, 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.