Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 July 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< July 25 July 27 >

July 26

[edit]

Template:Air Gear

[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 Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Air Gear (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only two links inside the template. deerstop. 23:37, 26 July 2010 (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:ICAI

[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 Delete. no longer used. Salix (talk): 13:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Updated nomination: No longer used following deletion of Accounting Standards Issued by ICAI, copying of template into Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, and merging & redirection of Audit and Assurance Standards issued by ICAI. - Fayenatic (talk) 22:55, 2 August 2010 (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:Major Central Libraries in the United Kingdom

[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 Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Major Central Libraries in the United Kingdom (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The definition of a 'major central library' appears to be original research. Pondle (talk) 17:50, 26 July 2010 (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:Bulletsign

[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 Userfy Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not used and somewhat duplicative to Template:Rollsign. Also, the creator used the edit summary "Created Test Template". Train2104 (talk) 19:44, 14 July 2010 (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) 16:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Move to my userspace. The NYCS articles now use SVG images; however, I'd like to preserve it for the clever use of CSS and HTML hacks. Same goes for Rollsign when the last transclusions are eliminated. — Dispenser 15:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: {{Rollsign}} shouldn't be deleted or userfied, it is used in several articles on discontinued services. As far as I know, there are no plans to deprecate it. Train2104 (talk) 17:43, 28 July 2010 (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:MMJHL Team

[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 Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:36, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MMJHL Team (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Hockey team}} Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:28, 13 July 2010 (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) 15:43, 26 July 2010 (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:RSA-OBR facilities

[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 Delete as orphaned, with no objection to merger with another infobox if required. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:12, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RSA-OBR facilities (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only used on one article, which has been tagged for deletion under CSD A3 (no context). If kept, this template needs to be rebuilt for accessibility as it fails WP:COLOR. Imzadi 1979 → 18:07, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and rename, I agree about the accessibility. Probably can be merged into some Infobox, but for now suggest renaming to "Infobox RSA-OBR facilities". The one article currently using it (Genting Sempah) has no deletion tags on it. Si Trew (talk) 10:44, 23 July 2010 (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) 15:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article was tagged. The article at best should be transformed from an article on a rest area (which fails WP:GNG) to an article on the town, assuming an actual town exists. Since the only usage of the template is for a non-notable subject, the template is unnecessary. In full disclosure, there is a lot of cleanup work needed for Malaysian highway-related articles. Most of the interchange articles fail WP:GNG. There are only about 60 articles on road junctions in the rest of the world, but 200 such for Malaysia alone. (It appears that every freeway interchange in the country has a name, much like all of the interchanges on the Pennsylvania Turnpike are named, but a name doesn't equal notability.) At some point this year, after the cleanup on {{infobox road}} and consolidation of the 40+ redundant templates is completed, I plan to AfD the majority of the Malay interchange articles. Imzadi 1979 → 20:52, 30 July 2010 (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:S-you

[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 Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:S-you (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is nothing but cruft and original research carried out by the creator. There is no significant notability for this template and as such is not required or needed on Wikipedia. If this template is allowed to stay it will open an unwated door to the proliferation of user created cruft templtes on narrow topics which are not noteworthy.--Lucy-marie (talk) 14:22, 26 July 2010 (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:Cat also

[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 Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cat also (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template which sorts categories, except that by using it, you make it harder to find and edit categories since they're not in the right order! Unnecessary barrier to novice editors. Axem Titanium (talk) 11:39, 26 July 2010 (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:Span

[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 Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:49, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Span (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Endspan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused typing aid template that reproduces the span element. Axem Titanium (talk) 11:22, 26 July 2010 (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:Greek myth (Olympian)

[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 Delete Greek myth (Olympian) and replace it with Greek myth (Olympian)2 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Greek myth (Olympian) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Greek myth (Olympian)2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Pick one: side bar or navbox. You don't need both. Axem Titanium (talk) 11:09, 26 July 2010 (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:2 and Template:3

[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 Move to {{sup2}} and salt causes potential problems with template parameters. Salix (talk): 15:01, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The purpose of these templates is to serve as typing shortcuts for typing <sup>2</sup> and <sup>3</sup>. While this might seem like a reasonable idea, there are a couple problems: (1) A common error in template programming is to type {{2}}} or {{{2}} instead of {{{2}}}, which would then transclude these templates. (2) Checking the links to these templates shows that they have a bit of a history, and have been used in the recent past for creating newlines. Hence, while I don't necessarily have the same objections to say {{^2}} or {{sup2}}, these should be left deleted (in my opinion). Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:35, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Author Comment: While I have taken all of these into note before creating the templates, I would like to state the following:
  1. I went through its history before conceiving the template, and while the concern of having {{{2}}} and {{{3}}} mistyped did cross my mind, I don't see how troubleshooting a programming error would differ very much if the end result would be Template:2} as opposed to 2}. Sure, one is a bit more spotable, but nevertheless, it's an error which has to be troubleshooted, regardless of the output. I doubt people would not double-check their templates before releasing them to the public, either. But that's just my opinion.
  2. I don't necessarily see how someone could deduce using {{2}} as a double-linebreak. Whether or not it makes sense, however, prior templates on both Template:2 and Template:3 were composed (to my recollection) mainly of blatant nonsense and test pages. Hence, I don't see how this would hold the current template back.
Other than this, I created the template mainly to reduce the keystrokes needed to create a superscript "2" and "3", effectively from the eleventwelve keystrokes of <sup>2</sup> to the five keystrokes of {{2}}. And when you are required to use the "2" or "3" often in prose, the difference shows. That's about it; but if the decision ever goes to remove the template from the page, I would like to recommend moving it to one of the redirects instead of simply deleting it, preferably to Template:Sup2 and Template:Sup3, accordingly. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Don't mean to be rude, but isn't that rather obvious seeing that the template is two-days old, with no one knowing it exists? EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 00:47, 27 July 2010 (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.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_July_26&oldid=1211679829"