Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 May 12
May 12
[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).
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:22, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Template:MLS Cup 2016 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
There is longstanding consensus that we do not have 'championship winning' squad roster templates for association football/soccer. GiantSnowman 19:48, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:49, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- Comment why not? Please direct me to this discussion. That sounds a lot like WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Quidster4040 (talk) 19:51, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Quidster4040: I know it's they are old discussions but please see as examples Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 22#Navbox question and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Archive 35#MLS Cup templates. There have been more recent discussions (both at TFD and WT:FOOTY, though I can't currently find them) but that consensus remains. GiantSnowman 06:57, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
- In that case, weak delete. Quidster4040 (talk) 16:12, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - per past discussions and consensus. I have no objection to the statistics or info of the squad being included in the team article if it already isn't. Inter&anthro (talk) 22:16, 19 May 2017 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:32, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Template:Gasdsen flag (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Do we need a template for Gadsden flag with only a picture? Marvellous Spider-Man 15:46, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- Delete, only one use and unclear purpose. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 16:02, 12 May 2017 (UTC) - Delete This is exactly what we aren’t supposed to do per the first sentence of the first bullet of WP:TG.Gonejackal (talk) 01:59, 13 May 2017 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2017 May 20. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Template:La Reine Margot (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- 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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was relisted on 2017 May 20. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:33, 20 May 2017 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
this template is full of redirects. Therefore template has no valueLibStar (talk) 11:56, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
- Delete, not useful. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 13:20, 12 May 2017 (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).