Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 October 3

< October 2	October 4 >

October 3

Template:Bathrooms

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 and replace with templates which are a bit more specific, like say "parts of a toilet" Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:22, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

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

I want to nominate this for flushing. This has to be the most useless navigation aid I've ever encountered on Wikipedia. What on earth is the connection between Ancient Bath House of Nazareth and Committee to End Pay Toilets in America and Towel???

Why would anyone reading any one of those want to be directed to another? Scott Mac 22:42, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Agreed. DELETE with extreme prejudice. What an incoherent collection. Bishonen | talk 22:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC).
• Keep and remove the "Specific bathrooms" group, as that seems to be the most unrelated. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 00:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Towel is also unrelated. Or can I add Soap shaving gel toothpaste and rubber duck?--Scott Mac 02:03, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  • And can I add European toilet paper holder and shampoo? conditioner? hair dye? highlights? And what about washing machine and detergent? In my culture, at least, those live in the bathroom and are used there. Bishonen | talk 09:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC).
• Keep. Clearly meets inclusion guidelines under Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, and does the job of linking somewhat related articles. In any navbox, while not every article is related to every other article in the navbox, every article listed is generally relevant at least to some other articles there. If something is seriously irrelevant, it can be removed, but that can be discussed on the template talk page if need be. Tatterfly (talk) 01:22, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I must be dense here. Please explain how this is useful. I didn't say every article needed to be related, but there does need to be some functional purpose. How does this help the reader? If you can explain that, I will withdraw. If not, then your keep arguments are not relevant to the debate.--Scott Mac 02:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
• Lordy. I can see the argument for keeping, but as Scott pointed out this simply screams "indiscriminate aggregation". If there is a reason why people reading about Japanese bathrooms should find the design of space toilets interesting then there should be a link to space toilet from the prose of Japanese toilet; a large and only very loosely collected bunch of links in the footer isn't really useful as a navigation aid, it's just a bunch of trivia links. It's hard enough for people to avoid being distracted on Wikipedia without essentially random grab-bags like this. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 12:46, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
• I found the list of all those different toilet types intriguing, so it might be worth converting the template into one just for toilet-related articles, e.g.

213.246.126.56 (talk) 18:24, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

• • I've no objection to a template that is a navbox for "types of toilet" or "parts of toilet", as long as it is something that clearly can't have Rubber duck in scope, it might actually be useful.--Scott Mac 21:21, 6 October 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.

Template:Ip-warning

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 Skier Dude (talk 02:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:Ip-warning (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The template's pretty much redundant ({{uw-vandal}} says almost the same stuff). The only extra feature the template has is a parameter that reads "Your Your IP address has been identified as {{{1}}}" which sounds a little Big Brother-ish. That parameter's unnecessary, because this would only go on the talk page of an IP, and the name of an IP's talk page is the IP. cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 21:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Delete - as redundant with Template:uw-vandalism2. --Bsherr (talk) 00:47, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
• Don't Mind - I created it, I didn't really know what I was doing, it can go.
  Limideen 20:13, 5 October 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.

Template:TEMPLATE NAME HERE

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 moot as speedily deleted Airplaneman ✈ 22:27, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:TEMPLATE NAME HERE (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is blank after removal of an improperly placed semi-protection template. Also, per Special:WhatLinksHere, the template has no transclusions or redirects. cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 21:25, 3 October 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.

Template:Odessa International Film Festival

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. WOSlinker (talk) 20:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:Odessa International Film Festival (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates between two articles. Could be needed if more OiFF happen in the future. Lugnuts (talk) 19:40, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Could potentially be useful in a few years time if we have more articles, but currently useless. PC78 (talk) 11:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and above comment. Farjad0322^{(talk|sign|contribs)} 15:20, 12 October 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.

Template:Stanley Cup Finals Local Broadcasters

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) 04:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:Stanley Cup Finals Local Broadcasters (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This strikes me as a just another bizarre template with no other function than to make articles show a large list at "what links here". Giving "related programs and networks" top billing is odd, since not one article on that row is actually a local broadcaster. The list of Stanley Cup Finals is both irrelevant and lacking in context, which leaves the actual list of local broadcasters buried amongst low value links. There is no navigational value in linking WOR (wherever that is) to CBXT (whose location is further hidden by being an easter egg link), so even the barely relevant links in this tamplate come off as nothing more than clutter. Resolute 17:24, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Delete Template does not add to the improvement of articles, it's simply a collection of links that are scarcely related.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (talk) 19:24, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Does not aid in navigation and just adds a mess of links to the page. -DJSasso (talk) 15:46, 5 October 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.

Template:Mauros to Bitaliano

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. WOSlinker (talk) 20:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:Mauros to Bitaliano (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Broken, unused, created by indef blocked editor who shows no sign of wanting to be unblocked Dougweller (talk) 10:24, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Delete The template is OR and SYNTH either way. (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Descendants of Mauros from Miletus). Constantine ✍ 11:24, 3 October 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.

Template:New Boyz

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) 04:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:New Boyz (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Duo has only released one studio album and three singles. In my eyes, this is just wasting space. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 02:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Delete If do not know the exact criteria for making templates about musical artists. But the duo is not much notable and has only released two studio albums so far. All links in the template can be easily linked in the main article as well. Farjad0322^{(talk|sign|contribs)} 15:18, 12 October 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.

Template:Diane Abbott

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. WOSlinker (talk) 20:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:Diane Abbott (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Too sparsely populated to be of any use. Not everything needs a navbox. – Hysteria18 ^{(Talk • Contributions)} 01:54, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Delete Not really enough links on it to keep. -- WOSlinker (talk) 13:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Delete WP:NENAN --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 21:27, 3 October 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.

User:Digitalme/BigVandalWarning

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, could be renominated at MFD. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Digitalme/BigVandalWarning (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I know this is a userpage, but it is meant to be used as a warning template, so I nominated it here. Redundant to {{uw-vandalism4im}}. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 01:28, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Close as out of scope - Not in template namespace. Can be proposed at MfD. --Bsherr (talk) 00:51, 4 October 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.