Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 March 24

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 24

[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) 00:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fact2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

We have {{fact}} for sentences that need reference. If the sentence is really controversial it should be removed immediately. Magioladitis (talk) 22:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete indeed. Also, the name itself is not helpful (the -2 does not add anything to the help or /doc or mental support). (If more disapprovement in such variants is desired, please take a look at Category:Hatnote templates). -DePiep (talk) 23:05, 24 March 2011 (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) 00:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Otheruses-number (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

hatnote. The name is wrong: it is about a "year". More important: it reproduces standard {{about}} text. So {{about}} covers it, and most likely does so because this template was used once in 2000 years. See the only usage (I removed today): 1067. In general: we do not need or want to sustain (with documentation, botchecking, &tc) a template that is individual. DePiep (talk) 22:21, 24 March 2011 (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) 02:27, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Germany/test-full (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Old template test, not used anywhere, template loop on talk page (see Category:Template loop warnings). Frietjes (talk) 18:45, 24 March 2011 (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) 00:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2011 SEC Baseball Standings (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Duplicate of Template:2011 Southeastern Conference baseball standings. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:18, 24 March 2011 (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) 00:17, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2011 Cricket World Cup finalists (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Useless. ashwinikalantri talk 18:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Even in the finished form, it looks like a over-enthusiastic use of templates. The information is already present in the article. A template is supposed to be used if the same info needs to be used in multiple articles. I see no use of this info in any article other than the main World Cup article. ashwinikalantri talk 05:13, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harrias talk 23:22, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all "YYYY Cricket World Cup finalists" templates per WP:NAV and WP:CLN. None of the titles of these nav boxes are articles and the pages they link to are only related as cricket teams, not as specifically having to do with a certain World Cup, let alone certain World Cup finalists. — Bility (talk) 17:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, these are more summary than navigation. Per Yellowdesk, article text is sufficient. Frietjes (talk) 19:13, 11 April 2011 (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 to delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:15, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Uw-mos4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Relisting per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 March 6. I abstain. King of 05:14, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep only if it's changed only be used to warn users for changing the style. If a user writes new content that has style errors then that is okay. If that becomes a problem AIV isn't the solution. A request for comment or some other noticeboard would be more relevant. -- Marcus Qwertyus 05:49, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Per what I said at DRV, there are specific cases where this warning makes sense. There was the case of a now blocked and vanished user who acted in good faith but persisted in changing the style of articles again and again without any possibility to talk to them. There was real other misbehavior except this stubbornness though. As Marcus Qwertyus notes above, this warning is not for people who create new content with style errors, even if they do it often. It's for those who keep changing the style even when they are reverted time and time again. It's the logical follow-up to {{uw-mos3}} and while rare, I think it's good to have different warnings for different behavior. Otherwise we could just use {{uw-generic4}} for everything (the whole point of different warnings is so that people know exactly what kind of behavior is blockworthy). Regards SoWhy 20:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:13, 24 March 2011 (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.