Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 December 30

< December 29	December 31 >

December 30

Template:MathCOTM

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) 00:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused and part of an inactive project. Magioladitis (talk) 23:24, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator Lazy Bastard Guy 23:49, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 22:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:WikiProject Mathematics isn't inactive, perhaps they'd like to revive or repoint this? -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 05:06, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Mathematics Collaboration of the Month is inactive. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:05, 1 January 2014 (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:Kyle

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 G8 by Amatulic (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:06, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Only one album article and his main article, plus three other topics that are only distantly relevant to him. WP:NENAN. Lazy Bastard Guy 22:36, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - As the articles on both the artist and his debut article are unlikely to survive the week (I AfD'd them and consensus is strong in favor of deletion right now), this is going to become a depreciated template on a non-notable subject very soon. Sven Manguard Wha? 19:52, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 22:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no head article (redlinked), not about Kyle either -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 05:09, 31 December 2013 (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:APBiology2010FA

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) 00:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:APBiology2010FA (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused in article talk space. Magioladitis (talk) 13:20, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 18:54, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 22:39, 30 December 2013 (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:Reqfreephotoin

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, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. It has been replaced by {{Image requested}}. Magioladitis (talk) 13:17, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 18:54, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 22:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand why something that could be deleted via T3 is relisted after 15 days. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:06, 1 January 2014 (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:Infobox SSSI Wales

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 by Anna Frodesiak (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:01, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox SSSI Wales (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

New creation, currently unused; Template:Infobox Site of Special Scientific Interest should work for Wales as well. eh bien mon prince (talk) 19:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes new creation, adapted from en. Currently used on 4 articles, but will be placed on over 950 shortly. En works for Wales? No it doesn't; as you can see it has enref only. I've amended this to read cyref (cy = Wales in this case), as the authority in Wales is certainly NOT Natural England! I did originally request that the Template:Infobox SSSI (Template talk:Infobox Site of Special Scientific Interest#Suitable only for England) be adapted to include the other nations of Britain, Wales included, but as you can see no one responded. Other additions need to be done including name of county. The present articles which have been churned out on english language wiki (eg Ceunant Cynfal National Nature Reserve would have been deleted a long time ago on cywp; I intend to produce better articles, which means I need a relevant, better Infobox. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 10:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - you asked for modification on Christmas Eve, and are surprised no-one has responded over the holiday period. Having had a look at the code, it seems it would be trivial to adapt for the other home nations, eg by adding the "cy" code you've used in this new template to the original one. GraemeLeggett (talk) 14:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between the two templates is really minor, see [1]. Templates should not be forked if it can be avoided. I tried to add the new features to the sandbox version of SSSI, you can see the result here.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 20:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks both. The additions make the new template un-needed. Can you add another field for County/ies please. Many thanks. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 08:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete, now that modifications have been made to the main template. Frietjes (talk) 19:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete —PC-XT+ 19:10, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:38, 4 January 2014 (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:Infobox UK settlement

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 G7 by Ronhjones (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:03, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox UK settlement (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This seems to be a fork of Template:Infobox settlement. We already have a UK-specific infobox for populated places, Template:Infobox UK place. eh bien mon prince (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete after replacement, and potentially redirect to the UK place template to avoid recreation. Frietjes (talk) 19:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to UK place after replacement — Good idea —PC-XT+ 19:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete It was just a sandbox template. I wasn't planning on using it. Atotalstranger (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2014 (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:Brunei English

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. DrKiernan (talk) 17:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Brunei English (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This isn't a native variety of English. — Lfdder (talk) 14:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment our article Brunei English would seem to differ on that point with you. -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 05:10, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go on. — Lfdder (talk) 07:16, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You should propose the article for deletion, as you seam clear that it isn't one. -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 00:26, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll let you figure this one out on your own. — Lfdder (talk) 01:02, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The basis of your nomination is that the variety isn't real, but there is an article, and you haven't nominated it for deletion. So the nomination of this template and the existence of the article are antithetical. The people who support deletion are using wholly different rationales that the one presented in the nomination. Reasoning from that presented in the nomination would suggest that deleting the article is a necessary action. -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 08:45, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, what I said is that it's not a _native_ variety, i.e. that it's not spoken natively. What would it mean for an article to be written in a non-native variety of English? 'Brunei English' would point to it being a variety (an emerging one, at least), but it can also simply mean, English as it's spoken in Brunei. There's no 'antithesis' here. Happy new year. — Lfdder (talk) 12:04, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – this is not a variety of English that wiki.riteme.site needs to include; it's too rare to be used in a worldwide encyclopedia, unlike the major English variants. Dicklyon (talk) 06:38, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Experts differ on whether Brunei English is a distinct variety. To the extent that it is, differences appear to be mainly in pronunciation and vocabulary, areas that would not be particularly salient in a (written) encyclopedia. Cnilep (talk) 11:44, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy - Even if we consider Brunei English to be a legitimate ENGVAR, creating this template was premature. We currently don't have any articles that are written in Brunei English to apply it to. If one is written (and we determine that it is appropriate to use that variety for that article) then we can shift the template back into main space. But as it stands now, there is no need for the template. Blueboar (talk) 13:10, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy or delete per Blueboar and Cnilep —PC-XT+ 15:19, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – per Dicklyon. United States Man (talk) 22:43, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When the need for such a template arises, it will be easy to recreate from scratch. Until then, delete. Keφr 11:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete as unused and unnecessary. If articles in Brunei English start appearing it's easily recreated.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 02:36, 10 January 2014 (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:Malaysian English

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. DrKiernan (talk) 17:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Malaysian English (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This isn't a native variety of English. — Lfdder (talk) 14:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment our article Malaysian English would seem to differ with you on that point -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 05:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go on. — Lfdder (talk) 07:16, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You should propose the article for deletion, as you seam clear that it isn't one. -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 00:26, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – this is not a variety of English that wiki.riteme.site needs to include; it's too rare to be used in a worldwide encyclopedia, unlike the major English variants. Dicklyon (talk) 06:38, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can find only a handful of experts who discuss Malaysian English as a unique dialect, and then mostly in terms of phonological distinctiveness. According to Malaysian English, the written form was identical to British English prior to an influx of Americanisms in the late twentieth century. Obviously all areas have distinctiveness that is worthy of respect, but in terms of a written encyclopedia this would not seem to need marking. Cnilep (talk) 11:57, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy - Even if we consider Malaysian English to be a legitimate ENGVAR, creating this template was premature. We currently don't have any articles that are written in Malaysian English to apply the template to. If one is written (and we determine that it is appropriate to use that variety for that article) then we can shift the template back into main space. But as it stands now, there is no need for the template. Blueboar (talk) 13:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy or delete per Cnilep and Blueboar —PC-XT+ 15:21, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – per Dicklyon. United States Man (talk) 22:44, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Before deleting, transclusions should probably be replaced by Template:British English, and frankly differences between British English and the Malaysian form would probably all fall under WP:Commonality anyway. CMD (talk) 14:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I've simply removed the 1 transclusion. — Lfdder (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete as unused and unnecessary. If articles in Malay English start appearing it's easily recreated.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 02:36, 10 January 2014 (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:Acad

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. DrKiernan (talk) 17:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The template is redundant to a better-designed template. The better designed template is at template:Venn. The Venn-version of this template is able to handle missing name= parameter by using the pagename. The extremely poorly designed acad "replacement" doesn't use this. There was no reason for it to be replaced. Barney the barney barney (talk) 11:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment do you mean template:VennAC ? -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 05:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong venue - Template:Venn was moved to template:Acad and changed, so it can't be redundant to itself. The place to discuss implementation is on the template's talk page. —PC-XT+ 17:06, 31 December 2013 (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:Illinois Interstate Highways

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. DrKiernan (talk) 19:39, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Illinois Interstate Highways (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per precedent - duplicate of List of Interstate Highways in Illinois. These styles of navboxes have been depreciated by WP:USRD. Admr Boltz 00:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, and WP:NENAN. --Rs chen 7754 01:00, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—per my comments below as the same rationale applies. Imzadi 1979 → 01:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. T C N7JM 01:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This navigational template gives a quick at-a-glance overview of all of the Interstate highways in Illinois. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 02:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So does the list. Hence the redundancy of keeping the template. T C N7JM 02:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per nom. Dough 48 72 02:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom —PC-XT+ 16:51, 31 December 2013 (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:Indiana Interstate Highways

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. DrKiernan (talk) 19:39, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Indiana Interstate Highways (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per precedent - duplicate of List of Interstate Highways in Indiana. These styles of navboxes have been depreciated by WP:USRD. Admr Boltz 00:36, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete—this template duplicates both the mentioned list and Category:Interstate Highways in Indiana. The redundancy is not needed, and not everything needs a navbox. Imzadi 1979 → 00:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and WP:NENAN. --Rs chen 7754 01:00, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. T C N7JM 01:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This navigational template gives a quick at-a-glance overview of all of the Interstate highways in Indiana. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 02:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So does the list. Hence the redundancy of keeping the template. T C N7JM 02:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per nom. Dough 48 72 02:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Imzadi1979 —PC-XT+ 16:56, 31 December 2013 (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.