Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 October 25
| < October 24 | October 26 > |
|---|
October 25
[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) 04:06, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
fork of {{historical populations}} with |pop_name=$ and |title=Historical income. Frietjes (talk) 21:34, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 11:24, 26 October 2013 (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) 02:22, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- Template:American topic (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Unused template. Redundant to Template:North American topic and Template:South American topic. Fitnr (talk) 17:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. -- Irn (talk) 20:06, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete. Extremely limited usefulness -Uyvsdi (talk) 23:19, 27 October 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
- Keep. Original reason for deletion is no longer true. —SPESH531Other 00:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete as redundant and adds more rather useless clutter. Vsmith (talk) 02:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete as redundant, and even worse it's confusing for readers. Spesh531 Why do you think this template is needed, in addition to the other 2 more specific templates? –Quiddity (talk) 05:15, 28 October 2013 (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) 02:22, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Template is barely used, and is redundant to Template:Countries of North America and South America, which have wide use. Fitnr (talk) 17:16, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. -- Irn (talk) 20:06, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per nom Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:49, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Keep. Original reason for deletion is no longer true. —SPESH531Other 00:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Comment It's wasn't in wide use until Spesh531 added it to a number of articles, but unfortunately it still duplicates Countries of North and South America and I'll add that North Amercian countries have as much to do with South American countries as European countries have to do with African countries. I assume that the only places where this makes sense is in Europe where they think of North and South America as a whole: "The Americas". This colonial mentality is demeaning and insulting. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Comment I added it because it was not in use where it was appropriate to use it. And when you say North American countries, do you mean USA and Canada? because Central America and South America (with the exception of the Guineas), have a lot to do with each other, and I am pretty sure Central America is part of North America. —SPESH531Other 01:56, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Please read WP:NOTUSA and also, North America. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:08, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Comment I added it because it was not in use where it was appropriate to use it. And when you say North American countries, do you mean USA and Canada? because Central America and South America (with the exception of the Guineas), have a lot to do with each other, and I am pretty sure Central America is part of North America. —SPESH531Other 01:56, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Comment It's wasn't in wide use until Spesh531 added it to a number of articles, but unfortunately it still duplicates Countries of North and South America and I'll add that North Amercian countries have as much to do with South American countries as European countries have to do with African countries. I assume that the only places where this makes sense is in Europe where they think of North and South America as a whole: "The Americas". This colonial mentality is demeaning and insulting. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:28, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete - Keep to the continents rather than opening it up to larger areas. May as well just have a Countries of the World and be done with it. I think we should try and keep things more concise rather than including as much as possible and stick to these on a continental scale rather than larger. Canterbury Tail talk 02:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete - redundant and adds more rather useless clutter. Vsmith (talk) 02:19, 28 October 2013 (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) 04:05, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
unused after I merged it with the Blacktown station article. Frietjes (talk) 14:50, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 11:24, 26 October 2013 (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 merge Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- Template:The Graphic Designer Barnstar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:The Graphic Designer's Barnstar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Propose merging Template:The Graphic Designer Barnstar with Template:The Graphic Designer's Barnstar.
They're both doing as the same purpose, and the newest one should be merged into the older one. kwan-in (talk) 06:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- merge Frietjes (talk) 20:26, 1 November 2013 (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.