Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 April 9

< April 8	April 10 >

April 9

Template:WoD vampire clans

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) 21:37, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WoD vampire clans (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Every page aside from one article (Malkavian) has since been redirected or deleted, which renders this template rather... limited, as a navbox. It's unlikely that any of these could be restored, and Malkavian should probably be redirected itself. It is currently being used by a couple of pages (like Vampire: The Dark Ages), but these articles have no reason to have a clan/bloodline navbox instead of just a general World of Darkness navbox. – The Millionth One (talk) (contribs) 23:48, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

delete after adding any missing links to Template:WoD. Frietjes (talk) 15:46, 10 April 2015 (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 county fire service

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 duplicate discussion. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:58, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox county fire service (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per a discussion HERE this template is being replaced with {{Infobox fire department}}. Also, this template is no longer used anywhere except on its own documentation page. Zackmann08 (talk) 20:48, 9 April 2015 (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:Largest cities of the Democratic Republic of the Congo

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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:25, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Largest cities of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Effectively guesswork and WP:OR. dates for numbers vary too widely to make a useful comparison and judge the size of the cities. The Banner talk 20:14, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It needs better referencing, and some inline citations, but I think this is verifiable information.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:51, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but at present the info is just unreliable as most of it are estimates. I know, organising a proper census in a country as troubled as the Democratic Republic of the Congo is difficult, but still it is not okay to have things sourced here by newspaper-estimates (Goma!). The Banner talk 10:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call the CIA World Factbook "newspaper estimates." But the info here isn't sourced solely to that. I don't doubt that the template needs better sourcing, I just challenge that it needs to be deleted.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 13:52, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I realized that you were referring specifically to Goma in regard to the "newspaper estimates." I'm trying to track down that BBC source to see where it got its information from.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:01, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For sourcing supporting Goma, see the template talk page, where I am going to list what my research found. I found ~~six~~ three other sources that confirm the BBC report. I think this demonstrates that whatever the sourcing problems might be on the template, they are not insurmountable, and thus the template should not be deleted.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please, look at each and every city and check the date of number of inhabitants. The Banner talk 23:30, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep So far, we can see that the template needs better sources. But that does not mean its inappropriate or useless. Dimadick (talk) 18:23, 12 April 2015 (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:Ancestors of Caroline Matilda

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) 21:23, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ancestors of Caroline Matilda (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template duplicates an ancestry tree already in the article Caroline Matilda of Great Britain. As it is specific tothe Caroline Matilda article there is no purpose the the template as to include it in the article would just complicated things for the less experienced editor. It is not link to any article. PBS (talk) 12:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

delete Frietjes (talk) 18:21, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - By all means... Although I'll question the fact that it is more complicated for the less experienced user to see a template than to see a bunch of code. --Harthacnut (talk) 17:23, 21 April 2015 (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:Rondel P. Lindayag

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) 21:22, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rondel P. Lindayag (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Who? Fails WP:NAVBOX as the subject of the navbox doesn't have an article. Also, we should only have director filmography navboxes, not for other film roles. Rob Sinden (talk) 12:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While I don't see why navboxes should be limited to creators, this particular one lacks a source article. Dimadick (talk) 18:57, 12 April 2015 (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:Brad Pitt

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 relisted on 2015 April 26. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:20, 26 April 2015 (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:Scott Rudin

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 relisted on 2015 April 26. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:20, 26 April 2015 (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:Brian Grazer

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 relisted on 2015 April 26. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:20, 26 April 2015 (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:Buck Henry

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 relisted on 2015 April 26. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:20, 26 April 2015 (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:Chinaplanetnames

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) 21:12, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hard-coded text citation template that is used in seven articles. The first heading line isn't included but it's including three separate citations into a single footnote. (See Mercury_(planet)#cite_ref-121, Jupiter#cite_ref-141, Saturn#cite_ref-113, etc.) which unnecessarily locks their usage in that manner. If the citations were to be split into three separate footnotes (such as if we broke out the Chinese, Korean and/or Japanese into more than a single sentence), it's excessive and unnecessary complication. It's also odd as the text only refers to Chinese and Japanese at Saturn while referring to "Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Vietnamese" cultures at Mercury creating more complications. Ricky81682 (talk) 04:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

split/substitute/delete Frietjes (talk) 18:20, 14 April 2015 (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:LVFCS Awards Chron

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. MER-C 12:23, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:LVFCS Awards Chron (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Downstream cleanup following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Las Vegas Film Critics Society (2nd nomination) j⚛e decker ^talk 02:49, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Navigation template that has now been deprecated due to deletion of all subject articles. Safiel (talk) 19:13, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per AFD closure Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:53, 11 April 2015 (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.