Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 October 6

< October 5	October 7 >

October 6

Template:Treason

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. delldot ∇. 03:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Separate sock template for a singular user, created by a user with a history of bad template making. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unnecessary. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 10:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unused. Not needed. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 04:35, 9 October 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:JarlaxleArtemis

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. delldot ∇. 03:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Do we really need a separate 'this user has been blocked indefinitely" for just one user, even one as problematic as this? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, use generic template instead. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 10:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unneeded, not used. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 04:37, 9 October 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:Campaignbox Galactic Civil War

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! 07:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Campaignbox Galactic Civil War (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

These now just redirect to the movie articles. (Individual event articles were plot summaries of excruciating detail.) --EEMIV (talk) 17:26, 6 October 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:Scouting Sections Infobox‎

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. delldot ∇. 02:47, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Scouting Sections Infobox‎ (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No longer in use, deprecated by {{Infobox WorldScouting}}. —— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 15:54, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with nom. --Bduke (Discussion) 20:56, 6 October 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:2008–09 WHL season by 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 section.

The result of the debate was G7 by Redvers, NAC. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:20, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2008–09 WHL season by team (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template was supposed to link to seasons of a junior hockey league, the two articles that were already created have both fallen to AFD and Prod, as such there is no need for the template. Djsasso (talk) 14:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Only red links. The category this template is supposed to be doesn't exist as well. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:07, 6 October 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:Simpsons 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 keep. delldot ∇. 02:42, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Simpsons character (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is specific to only The Simpsons and Template:Infobox character can get the job done just as good making this template redundant. Mythdon (talk) 09:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I will support if Template:Infobox character gets a "Voice actor" option. --Maitch (talk) 09:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The "portrayed by" parameter is also used to describe who voices a character. However, I suggest you discuss your "voice actor" parameter matter on Template talk:Infobox character. Mythdon (talk) 09:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Upon seeing this nomination I was going to say "keep", as I had assumed there would be fields on the Simpsons one that wouldn't be included on the generic one; however, this is probably not the case, especially since there are "lbl21"-"lbl35" fields in the generic. I suppose one could argue a difference between "voice actor" and "potrayed by", but that won't be me. Delete Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 09:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - yes, infobox character does the same thing, but the colours/etc provide a distinctive look that familiarizes the page immediately and brings it into context. Prince of Canada^{t | c} 12:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The coloring is very easy. The generic template supports "color" :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Several of these characters have appeared in both The Simpsons and the Tracey Ullman Show shorts, so the current template allows for the first appearances in both shows to be easily displayed. You can say that the parameter could be included in a generic template, but then it would have to be "First appearance in the Tracey Ullman Shorts" and that is too long. The current one looks better than a generic one possibly could. As well, the generic template contains several fields that we really don't want to go to, including episode count, nicknames, age (which caused a LOT of edit wars when the field was on this template), nationality, religion, date of birth/death and created by. I can guarantee that these fields would cause edit wars if the fans could add them to pages. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 14:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as I do not see what Wikipedia would gain from the deletion of this template and it gives pages about The Simpsons characters a nice, uniform look, I feel, with minimum fuss (e.g. no need to specify the colour of the infobox each time). It Is Me Here (talk) 18:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As mentioned by user:Scorpion0422, we had several problems with edit warring over ages of characters, as they change, and are not definite. Several of the parameters on Template:Infobox character would cause too many problems, with conflicting information in different episodes, such as, birth date, death date, religion, and even nationality. In fact, I think most TV shows should have their own character infobox, related to specifics of that show. CTJF83Talk 21:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I know what you guys mean about the age edit wars. It's one of the things I miss about having a show-specific infobox for another show that I edit on that switched to a more generic one. -- Ned Scott 02:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Generally speaking, we should avoid making show-specific templates, but this is a case where it just seems easier to do it this way, and covers a fairly good number of uses (not just one or three pages). Meh. -- Ned Scott 22:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Just to expand on that note, it covers roughly 40-45 character pages (and is used twice on some). -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While we're at it, if it's kept, Possibly rename to "infobox Simpsons character" due to the similarily named {{Simpsons characters}}. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Extremely useful. Agree with everything said by all of the Keeps, above. Cirt (talk) 00:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As explained above, this template addresses an unusual set of circumstances in a manner that {{infobox character}} cannot. —David Levy 17:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep to avoid edit wars. --TheLeft orium 19:33, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Matthew raises some good points, but I think we can just add those to the template's sub-lines. — ceranthor ^(strike) 20:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to keep it. No way to merge it in the generic template with a creative way. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:15, 12 October 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.