User talk:Plastikspork: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 34: Line 34:


Can you undelete this? It's part of a [[Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#Which_identifiers.3F|family of templates for citation identifiers]], like {{tl|hdl}} and {{tl|bibcode}}. Not having it is detrimental to citation style flexibility. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|contribs]] / [[WP:PHYS|physics]] / [[WP:WBOOKS|books]]}</span> 15:07, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Can you undelete this? It's part of a [[Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#Which_identifiers.3F|family of templates for citation identifiers]], like {{tl|hdl}} and {{tl|bibcode}}. Not having it is detrimental to citation style flexibility. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">[[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]] {[[User talk:Headbomb|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Headbomb|contribs]] / [[WP:PHYS|physics]] / [[WP:WBOOKS|books]]}</span> 15:07, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
: (tps) [[User:Headbomb|Headbomb]], no objection from me (who !voted) if you are planning to use it. [[User:Frietjes|Frietjes]] ([[User talk:Frietjes|talk]]) 16:53, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:53, 20 September 2016


Thanks! Who will be doing the merging, since the main template is locked?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 03:36, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(tps) Kintetsubuffalo, I did it. please feel free to help with the documentation. Frietjes (talk) 16:52, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cite NRO

Hi, I'm not sure I understand this close. Sure, two editors !voted "delete" and I was the only one explicitly arguing for keeping, but it's not raw vote count that matters, is it? I'd expect a discussion leading to consensus, and I wouldn't have minded if any of the other two participants had addressed my arguments. Is there some policy that I'm missing which says that templates should be deleted simply on the grounds of being unused? Uanfala (talk) 08:03, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(tps) Uanfala, item 3 in Reasons to delete a template was addressed by User:BU Rob13 with the comment "The evidence that this isn't likely to be used is obvious here". Frietjes (talk) 16:52, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

TFD:2016 September 4#Single-use_weatherbox_templates

Why did you wait a full week after closing to address to deal with the formerly doubly transcluded templates? The unanimous opinion only applied to those templates with single transclusion. CaradhrasAiguo (talk) 13:50, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Navbox prehistoric caves

You relisted Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 September 20#Template:Navbox prehistoric caves. At the point you did, there were 2 delete votes, the nominator and a 2nd person who thought it was too big, and 4 supports. I didn't vote because I really thought it had been resolved as after the 2nd person voted delete because of the size it was revised so that it splits by continent, which should have satisifed that editor. I've now voted also. As the concerns about size had been met, I didn't think it would be relisted and still don't think it should have been. Doug Weller talk 14:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Undelete Template:OSTI

Can you undelete this? It's part of a family of templates for citation identifiers, like {{hdl}} and {{bibcode}}. Not having it is detrimental to citation style flexibility. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:07, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(tps) Headbomb, no objection from me (who !voted) if you are planning to use it. Frietjes (talk) 16:53, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]