Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 November 26

< November 25	November 27 >

November 26[edit]

Template:FMAMCombine[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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanGerbil10(Говорить!) 03:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template was used to link the AM and FM templates of a radio market area. With the conversion to the navbox format, all AM and FM templates have been combined into single templates, making this template obsolete. — JPG-GR (talk) 23:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as obsolete, per nom. Terraxos 01:55, 3 December 2007 (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:Cite 34TBC[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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanGerbil10(Говорить!) 03:33, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed from speedy deletion category: Unused adaptation of {{Cite book}}. SkierRMH (talk) 21:04, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Subst and Delete as a filled-in version of {{Cite book}}. JPG-GR (talk) 22:27, 26 November 2007 (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:Diddy Kong Racing characters[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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanGerbil10(Говорить!) 03:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most of these either link to List of Donkey Kong characters or a deleted article, making this not useful for navigation. — Pagra shtak 19:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Majority of characters do not have own articles. Unneeded. JPG-GR (talk) 22:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There's already a list of the characters in the game. Martin B 10:41, 1 December 2007 (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:VicStation[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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanGerbil10(Говорить!) 03:36, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't used anywhere. Wongm (talk) 15:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as abandoned and with no clear use in the future. No modifications in more than a year. JPG-GR (talk) 22:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unused/deprecated. SkierRMH (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2007 (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:Maltese Third Division[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 page.

The result of the debate was to keep. RyanGerbil10(Говорить!) 03:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This chronicles the third tier of football of a very small country. Non-notable.

Keep - The division is notable, as are ten of its 19 clubs. That's notable in my book. – Pee Jay 16:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions. – Pee Jay 23:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I think this relates to a wider discussion than the mere template. As far as I can see, the only two clubs in the Maltese 3rd Division that I would automatically support as being notable would be Gzira and Zebbug (ironically one of those not to have an article). - fchd (talk) 11:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per related AfD debate. ugen64 (talk) 18:24, 29 November 2007 (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:ReelzChannel[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 page.

The result of the debate was speedy deleted — Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 22:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Unwarranted linkspam requested by editor (WDS07 (talk · contribs)) with no prior edits. — Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 15:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The intention for this template is to provide reference to the vast amount of interviews and reviews on reelzchannel. There doesn't seem to be any way to directly source the videos (interviews, clips) and/or reviews other than providing a link to the movie page. According to What should be linked, #4 "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews" and Links to be considered #1 "For albums, movies, books, and other creative works, links to professional reviews," this doesn't constitute linkspam. The template is similar to IMDb, AMG, Metacritic, etc. WDS07 (talk) 22:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete as linkspam (and tagged as such by myself). JPG-GR (talk) 22:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Deleted by me. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 22:38, 26 November 2007 (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:1995 Atlantic Division Standings[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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Maxim_(talk) 13:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC) Completely unused template. Information already contained in 1994-95 NHL season. — Flibirigit (talk) 07:04, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unnecessary. Final standings from ten years ago are static, and will never change. The eight articles that would use such a template already have the standings directly in the articles. Reso lute 16:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Resolute. JPG-GR (talk) 22:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Kaiser matias (talk) 05:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and resolute. --Djsasso (talk) 06:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom & resolute.! SkierRMH (talk) 00:16, 29 November 2007 (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:NEHL arenas[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 page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Maxim_(talk) 13:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two templates (NEHL Teams & NEHL Arenas), consolidated into Template:NEHL, rendering this redundant. — Flibirigit (talk) 06:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.--Esprit15d(۝ • ۞ • ▲) 15:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Djsasso (talk) 06:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Kaiser matias (talk) 08:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant & superseded. SkierRMH (talk) 00:01, 29 November 2007 (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 NJT[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 page.

The result of the debate was deleted per user request (Geoking66), unused. SkierRMH (talk) 23:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This template, intended for use in templates for NJ Transit railroad stations, is made redundant by the {{Infobox Station}} template, and all articles that used this template had it replaced with the Infobox Station template. — AEMoreira042281 (talk) 01:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Wouldn't it be better to tag with {{tdeprecated}}? —Dispenser (talk) 01:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Even though it's mine, this was made around the same time as Infobox Station and is now unnecessary. Geoking66_talk 01:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant, unused, and with author's approval above. JPG-GR (talk) 22:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's better to standardize on one infobox. —MJCdetroit (talk) 17:02, 28 November 2007 (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.