Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 January 12
| < January 11 | January 13 > |
|---|
January 12
[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.
- Template:Om nom nom (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
The result of the discussion was delete ... per nom. Magioladitis (talk) 00:29, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Utterly redundant and useless, it would take more time to type this template than it would to simply write "support per nom". A misnomer as well. Atlan (talk) 14:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete or move to userspace - There is no need for this template to be in template namespace. Doesn't take longer to write "support per nom". If creator of this template really wants to use template like this, move it to userspace. Ilyushka ☃Talk!Contribs 15:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support per nom (written, not substed....) Doc Quintana (talk) 20:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support per nom. (i'd take it in my user space. it was kind of written for me; i had called gurch Cookie Monster.) delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 18:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Haha, it is only now that I realize the name is supposed to be the sound that cookie monster makes when he eats a cookie. :-) --Atlan (talk) 18:24, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Silly stupidity from Gurch. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; I did chuckle though. --Cybercobra (talk) 06:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep handy for deletionists who can't think for themselves. --William S. Saturn (talk) 18:56, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hilarious, but delete - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 11:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep best template ever. ···Lauryn 22:55, 18 January 2010 (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.
- 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 deletion. (G8) -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Template:Gonzoe (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Not employed in any useful fashion, nor expected to be. The topic of the template was deleted via deletion discussion earlier this month. SchuminWeb (Talk) 13:10, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete as the topic of the template is deleted and no articles use the template. Ilyushka ☃Talk!Contribs 13:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete subject of template is non-notable, template is pointless. TheJazzDalek (talk) 13:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- G8 Parent article was deleted. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 12:25, 15 January 2010 (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.
- 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) 00:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Unused and dupe of content of Template:Obama cabinet. — MrDolomite • Talk 07:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep and delete the other template. Doc Quintana (talk) 20:54, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. Waaay overblown for a navigation template (pictures of every person, and logos for every office!), and not useful in any other way. The other template isn't a masterpiece, but it is at least of workable size and used on the relevant articles. --RL0919 (talk) 02:12, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per RL0919. Only possible use might be on the article on the cabinet itself, but certainly not as a navbox. --Cybercobra (talk) 06:44, 15 January 2010 (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.
- 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 —EncMstr (talk) 22:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Unused for over a year and a new WP:ORE scheme is being written —EncMstr (talk) 06:08, 12 January 2010 (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.
- 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 —EncMstr (talk) 22:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Unused for over a year and a new WP:ORE scheme is being written —EncMstr (talk) 06:07, 12 January 2010 (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.
- 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 —EncMstr (talk) 22:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Unused for over a year and a new WP:ORE scheme is being written —EncMstr (talk) 06:06, 12 January 2010 (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.
- 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 —EncMstr (talk) 22:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Template:BC New (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Orphaned template. I asked WikiProject:Brazil if it was of any use and received no response. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:35, 12 January 2010 (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.