Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 September 21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 21

[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 discussion was keep. JPG-GR (talk) 13:27, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:EmmyAward ComedyLeadActress 1976-2000 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:EmmyAward ComedyLeadActress 1950-1975 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:EmmyAward ComedyLeadActor 2001-2025 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to Template:EmmyAward ComedyLeadActor. There are duplicates for nearly every category in Emmy Awards. I cannot figure out why there is a need for break-down templates when there is a main template for each award. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:16, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Delete as redundant, I think, and replace with the complete template. The breakout templates and the complete one are used in a somewhat scattershot fashion. My initial thought was that perhaps someone had complained about the combined template being too big, but all the templates were created around the same time, and there are no talk page links to any of them to indicate any concerns being expressed. (Perhaps there is a discussion somewhere that is not linked?) So absent any other justification, one template seems better than three. It might be a good idea to edit the complete template to make the sections collapsible, because it's only going to get bigger. --RL0919 (talk) 14:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC) Update: Withdrawing my !vote per comments by Zzyzx11 below. If these are the standard, someone should nominate Template:EmmyAward ComedyLeadActor for deletion instead. --RL0919 (talk) 15:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep -possibly used to avoid crowding--ᜊᜓᜅ ᜅ᜔ ᜑᜎᜋᜅ᜔ ᜋᜑᜒᜏᜄ
(ᜑ᜔ᜎᜒᜃ ᜐᜓᜋᜎᜒ ᜃ ᜐ ᜂᜐᜉᜈ) 11:35, 24 September 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.
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 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kenny Smyth (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Non likely to be populated any further -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 22:08, 21 September 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.
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 speedy delete per author request (G7). JamieS93 16:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Adrianne Leon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The subject's body of work is too small and majority of the links are just redirects. Greene Leigh Online (talk) 19:03, 21 September 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.
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 consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 13:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox City Lebanon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox settlement}}, with which instances should be replaced. Used only 112 times. This is part of a large-scale operation to merge similar geographical infoboxes into the generic parent, to reduce maintenance overheads. Conversion will be carried out before deletion. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:37, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecate per nom. Actually I did some work on Lebanon in the past and one of the editors was not opposed to me adding a standard template, so I think this could easily be converted without major problems. I'd think twice though about nominating the Israel and Palestine infoboxes... Himalayan 14:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I noted that the arguments given above for keeping this template are 1) generally preferring regionalized templates over the generic one, and 2) not liking the overall way the settlement templates have been nominated for individual TfDs instead of having a centralized discussion. Neither argument seems to say anything specific about why this particular template is a good one to keep. In contrast, there have been particular arguments made as to the deficiencies of this template (see Plastikspork's comments about the redundant fields above). --RL0919 (talk) 17:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep. Possibly useful.--ᜊᜓᜅ ᜅ᜔ ᜑᜎᜋᜅ᜔ ᜋᜑᜒᜏᜄ
(ᜑ᜔ᜎᜒᜃ ᜐᜓᜋᜎᜒ ᜃ ᜐ ᜂᜐᜉᜈ) 11:36, 24 September 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.
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 consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 13:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox City Taiwan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox settlement}}, with which instances should be replaced. Used only 12 times twice. This is part of a large-scale operation to merge similar geographical infoboxes into the generic parent, to reduce maintenance overheads. Conversion will be carried out before deletion. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:32, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep. Possibly useful.--ᜊᜓᜅ ᜅ᜔ ᜑᜎᜋᜅ᜔ ᜋᜑᜒᜏᜄ
(ᜑ᜔ᜎᜒᜃ ᜐᜓᜋᜎᜒ ᜃ ᜐ ᜂᜐᜉᜈ) 11:36, 24 September 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.
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. Jafeluv (talk) 22:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Road Rules Castmember (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is currently unused and redundant. The six or seven Road Rules contestants with individual articles use either {{infobox model}} or {{infobox journalist}} or {{infobox person}} or something else. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:48, 21 September 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.
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 keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:American broadcast television (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Apparently a wrapped template that transcludes four other templates in an attempt to cover all aspects of American television broadcasting. Used this way, and with its attempt to include every American channel, this template is just too big and too bloated. It does not aid in navigation in any real sense, and I can not see how it could be refactored to try to make it any more useful for its namesake. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 04:07, 21 September 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.
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 keep with modification.  Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:American broadcast television (English) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A template trying to cover every American broadcast channel is just way too larger to control, and does not aid navigation in any meaningful sense. I just can not see what value this template adds at all, particularly when it consists of both a plethora of links and another template, Template: American broadcast television (English) defunct for defunt channels, and is itself transcluded in Template:American broadcast television. There are 150+ channels in the US...that is just too many to cover in a template like this. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 04:05, 21 September 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.
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. T3 could also be used for this one. Magioladitis (talk) 15:51, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Chilean Political Party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant with {{Infobox political party}}. Few uses. Locos epraix ~ Beastepraix 00:30, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

keep. Possibly useful.--ᜊᜓᜅ ᜅ᜔ ᜑᜎᜋᜅ᜔ ᜋᜑᜒᜏᜄ
(ᜑ᜔ᜎᜒᜃ ᜐᜓᜋᜎᜒ ᜃ ᜐ ᜂᜐᜉᜈ) 11:36, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would you care to provide a more helpful reasoning? 81.110.104.91 (talk) 16:37, 24 September 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.