Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 April 1
April 1
[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) 00:26, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
broken, orphaned, and can be replaced by other templates. 64.134.156.152 (talk) 17:25, 1 April 2012 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 22:22, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Kochi Tuskers are defunct and hence no longer have a current squad, making this template obsolete. Jenks24 (talk) 11:43, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom extra999 (talk) 12:55, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Quite acid trippy as well!!! AssociateAffiliate (talk) 13:15, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per above. S.G.(GH) ping! 12:51, 3 April 2012 (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 no consensus, but if the articles are deleted at AFD, then this can be speedy deleted. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:29, 9 April 2012 (UTC) Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:29, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
- Template:Gambir, Jakarta (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
The stubs connected with this template are less than the usually accepted 'Village' level in the Indonesian project, and have not been given any sufficient WP:RS or WP:CITE backup to justify the stubs or this template - and merely a mirror of WP id stubs which are notoriously lacking and semblance of WP:RS or WP:N when created SatuSuro 06:02, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per SS. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:58, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep if nom. is so sure that the entries are to be deleted; s/he should do that first - the first village he nominated seems unlikely to be deleted; one could easily extrapolate to the remainder. Nav templates are useful and since the villages aren't deleted (and perhaps are unlikely to be deleted), deletion of the Nav template is just plain silly. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:14, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
- Conditional Keep - All of the articles listed within the template are in AfD. If the articles are kept, then keep the template as a useful navigation bar. If the articles are all deleted, then delete the template. If some of the articles are deleted, remove those entries from the template and retain the template for links to articles that remain. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:56, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
- Comment - to have a template for 5 of the 5,000- 7,000 (depending on various sources variation) plus sub divisions of indonesian villages is pointless to say the least SatuSuro 13:12, 3 April 2012 (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) 00:27, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused, unlikely to be used in it's current format, unchanged since 26 September 2007 EmanWilm (talk) 05:23, 1 April 2012 (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 April 1 is over. Today is the 3rd April. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 12:43, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 | This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously. |
To stop the rampant deletions going on today. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:45, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
- Rename to {{Articles for discussion}} since we should be discussing things. ;-P 70.24.244.198 (talk) 04:35, 1 April 2012 (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.