Template talk:GFDL-1.2

This template was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 2018 September 6, see discussion.
Keep, 2009 April 9, see discussion.
Keep, 2008 May 20, see discussion.

Archives

Imbox standardization[edit]

Please change the template code to the following for purposes for {{Imbox}} standardization. Kelly ^hi! 00:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{imbox
| type      = license
| image     = [[Image:Heckert GNU white.svg|52px|GFDL]]
| text      = 
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the '''[[Wikipedia:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License|GNU Free Documentation License]]''', Version 1.2 and no other versions published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.
}}{{image other 
| [[Category:GFDL 1.2 images|{{PAGENAME}}]] 
}}{{free media}}<noinclude>

{{pp-template|small=yes}}
{{Documentation}}
<!-- Add categories and interwikis to the /doc subpage, not here! -->
</noinclude>

Deprecating this template for future use[edit]

I have proposed deprecating future use of both this template and {{GFDL-1.2-en}} on the GFDL-1.2-en talk page. Please join the discussion there. Thanks! Kaldari (talk) 21:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I note that you have changed the template to say that images tagged with only this license can be speedied under CSD:F3. I have reverted this; please gather a consensus before restoring it. Deprecation means that the tags are discouraged from further use, but no more. Stifle (talk) 13:24, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this under T2[edit]

{{editprotected}} This template is eligible for speedy deletion as it is no longer employed in any useful fashion on Wikipedia, could you please delete this? ViperSnake151 02:15, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to remove the editprotected tag as I'm involved in the discussions on Template talk:GFDL-1.2-en, but consensus has been not been agreed this should be deleted. Anyway, we have fomal methods of proposing deletion. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 04:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to agree that using editprotected is not the proper way to have this template deleted and have taken down the tag. It should be put up for TFD and reviewed. --CapitalR (talk) 07:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]