Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 October 14

< October 13	October 15 >

October 14

Template:Infobox volleyball coach

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 merge Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:20, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox volleyball coach (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Merge with {{Infobox volleyball player}} to a new {{Infobox volleyball biography}} exactly as we did with footballers, WBNA players, etc. All coaches have been players before. Magioladitis (talk) 23:56, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a no-brainer, and I don't think it's controversial enough to require discussion in advance. It just needs someone to do the actual work, which doesn't look too difficult with the current codebases but will require some elbow grease. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:30, 15 October 2012 (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:Meelhuysen

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, I will paste the contents below if you want to userfy it. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:19, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{cite book| last=Meelhuysen |first=Vincent| year=2004| title=The Encyclopedia of Dutch Black Metal| location=Rotterdam | pages={{{1|}}} |chapter={{{2|}}}}}

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

Unused. -— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 21:48, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's my own fault. I got the encyclopedia in, used it, made the template, and then moved on to other areas. It is, however, not without merit since Meelhuysen is the only reliable reference for Dutch black metal--though I fully realize that this cuts down the field of usefulness considerably. Anyways, if I can dig it up (we moved since I created the template) I might prove you wrong and use it somewhere. As it is, I can't really contest this deletion rationale. Drmies (talk) 22:01, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to keep it as a reference for later use, copy it to a user subpage; see User:Gadget850/Pershing bibliography for an example. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:02, 15 October 2012 (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:WikiProject Karaims

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; deleted as G4 by Tom Morris (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:12, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Karaims (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template was created for a bogus Wikiproject. The Wikiproject has been deleted, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Karaims, so it is appropriate to delete the template for the Wikiproject. Toddy1 (talk) 20:49, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Speedily... -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 23:04, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. ASAP...warshy ^talk 00:27, 15 October 2012 (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:Jun Fukuda

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 keep, but no consensus on whether or not there should be plain text in the template. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jun Fukuda (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Mostly redlinks so it does not serve as a very useful navigation tool. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 10:06, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

keep after cutting the redlinks (which I will do in a moment). A director template with 9 blue links is certainly useful. Frietjes (talk) 19:12, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it fair to the readership to have a template that gives a false impression? If I saw the template I would think that Jun Fukuda only made nine films. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:36, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

well, then add them back in but not as redlinks, or add a note saying this is just the ones with articles. seems like hardly a reason to delete the template. Frietjes (talk) 20:23, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox templates are, as the name suggests, for navigation and not merely listing things. Some editors^{[citation needed]}, including myself do not agree with having unlinked text in a navbox. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 01:56, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

so, your opinion is (1) no red links in the navbox template and (2) no plain text in the navbox template and (3) navbox templates are misleading unless they are complete. from this we conclude that either (a) you think all navbox templates without all the articles written should be deleted or (b) there another option? Frietjes (talk) 23:12, 22 October 2012 (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.