Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2009 October 31

< October 30	November 1 >

October 31

Template:Lien web

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 discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 04:11, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lien web (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Was in use one three pages, as the French counterpart of {{Cite web}}, untill I replaced them by {{Cite web}}. I have strong doubts about whether the template translates parameters the correct way, compaired to how they are used on the French Wikipedia, see [1]. I do not think we need a template for editors who are too lazy to use our own English Wikipedia citation templates. And also because if we would do this for all languages, we would be in serious trouble. Debresser (talk) 20:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Pointless template, this is the English Wikipedia and as such we should be using the English template variants. Peachey88 ^{(Talk Page · Contribs)} 23:41, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Peachey88 (talk · contribs). --Ixfd64 (talk) 01:42, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant and undesirable for the reasons stated above. --RL0919 (talk) 01:52, 1 November 2009 (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:Main page banner

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 discussion was procedural close. This is a matter for WP:RfD. JPG-GR (talk) 04:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Main page banner (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template was used on the main page, but not anymore. It s currently a redirect to {{Main Page banner}}. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Is this deletion in relation to the Redirect or the Template the redirect leads to? Peachey88 ^{(Talk Page · Contribs)} 23:41, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy procedural close wrong forum. This is an RfD issue. 76.66.203.102 (talk) 06:09, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the requested deletion is just for the redirect, then I agree that it should go to Redirects for Discussion instead. --RL0919 (talk) 15:26, 2 November 2009 (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:Geobox River

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 discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 20:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Geobox River (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Geobox Mountain Range (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

These templates are no longer used in any articles. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:20, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although it has just recently been deprecated, I think that is no problem, since {{Geobox}} can fulfill all of its functions. BTW, I am surprised the nominator didn't also nominate {{Geobox Mountain Range}}, which was deprecated along with {{Geobox River}}. Debresser (talk) 17:54, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unused and redundant. --RL0919 (talk) 14:51, 4 November 2009 (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:Locate me

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 discussion was deleted. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 06:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Locate me (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Locate me long (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

These template are deprecated and are no longer used in any articles. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:17, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I deprecated them (or had a big hand in it, don't remember the details), and it is time for their deletion. Debresser (talk) 17:41, 31 October 2009 (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:Taxobox regnum entry

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 discussion was deleted. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 06:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Taxobox regnum entry (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template has been deprecated; it is currently not used in any article. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unused outside of a few user sandbox pages, and redundant to {{Taxobox}}. --RL0919 (talk) 15:31, 2 November 2009 (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:Arizona delegation to the 110th Congress

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 discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 20:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Arizona delegation to the 110th Congress (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Alaska delegation to the 110th Congress (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Alabama delegation to the 110th Congress (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Old, unused templates. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:07, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as outdated and unused. The list at a previous discussion suggests that there are a bunch more like these that also ought to be deleted. --RL0919 (talk) 15:14, 6 November 2009 (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:1984 NL Standings

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 discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 20:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1984 NL Standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Old, unused template. It could be substituted if there is an article where this information could be of some use. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:04, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Oddly enough, the NL standings weren't in 1984 Major League Baseball season, I've just added them there. No other uses for this template that I can think of. BryanG (talk) 23:34, 6 November 2009 (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:2007 NL Wild Card standings

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 discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 20:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2007 NL Wild Card standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Old, unused template. Could be substituted if there is an article that could use this information? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:03, 31 October 2009 (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:Egyptian Second Division

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 discussion was no action at this time - prods have been contested. No prejudice to any future discussion. JPG-GR (talk) 20:03, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Egyptian Second Division (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is for a non-national level football league, in which most of the teams listed fail WP:FOOTYN... Half of the links used on the template are redlinked (non-notable teams), and most of the rest of the teams have been prodded... With only a handful of the teams listed passing WP:FOOTYN, the template is doomed to forever be full of 99% redlinks... Adolphus79 (talk) 15:55, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Prod deletion has been contested for those teams which were prodded, so, unless and until these get deleted at AfD they are not doomed to be redlinks. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:59, 2 November 2009 (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:Brewer

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 discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 20:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Old, unused template Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:42, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The edit summary at it's creation ("may as well have this") suggests that it was created speculatively, in case it might be useful. The lack of use in the years since suggests that speculation was wrong. --RL0919 (talk) 15:18, 6 November 2009 (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.