Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 July 9

< July 8	July 10 >

July 9, 2006

Military history project banners

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 --Cyde↔Weys 23:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WPMILHIST British military history task force (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:WPMILHIST Canadian military history task force (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:WPMILHIST Classical warfare task force (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:WPMILHIST Middle Ages task force (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:WPMILHIST Napoleonic Era task force (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:WPMILHIST Polish military history task force (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:WPMILHIST United States military history task force (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:WPMILHIST World War II task force (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

These are an older impementation of task force banners for article talk pages that have been obsoleted by the task force tags integrated into the main {{WPMILHIST}}, and are no longer in use on any articles. Kirill Lokshin 22:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the templates seem useless. The new version is better. Mário 09:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nominator these templates are now deprecated and have been replaced. -- Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 15:25, 14 July 2006 (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 page.

Template:Book card

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 (already orphaned) --William Allen Simpson 03:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Superseded by {{Infobox book}}. ♥ Her Pegship♥ 17:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is a better template used by the novels wikiproject. Sophy's Duckling 18:58, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete {{Infobox Book}} is quite adequate to the vast amjority of books, this is used by WikiProject Books and WikiProject Novels. This is completely redundant, delete. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete inferior and redundant. feydey 09:37, 10 July 2006 (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 page.

Playboy Cyber Club

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 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Playboy Cyber Club --William Allen Simpson 03:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2000 Cyber Girls (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:2001 Cyber Girls (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:2002 Cyber Girls (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:2003 Cyber Girls (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:2004 Cyber Girls (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:2005 Cyber Girls (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:2006 Cyber Girls of the Week (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

These templates were listed by another user at this AfD. I'm listing the templates here without offering any opinion on the nomination. Luna Santin 12:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies; I've got CfD/AfD experience, but I've never listed a template before. Could someone more experienced help me out with tagging these? Luna Santin 12:55, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged them all. For future reference, just put {{tfd}} above the template. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 17:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. It sounded more complicated, somehow, heh. Thanks! Luna Santin 19:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as Porncruft. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 17:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No matter the outcome of the Afd, because they're only used in one spot in the article space. ~ trialsanderrors 17:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Avillia ^{(Avillia me!)} 18:52, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Mr Lefty and nomination. Sophy's Duckling 18:59, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per trialsanderrors.--Chaser T 07:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Alphachimp ^talk 04:29, 11 July 2006 (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 page.

Template:Potc

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 (already orphaned) --William Allen Simpson 03:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's clearly not needed, under points 2 and 3 above (redundant and unused). It contains a list of the three films. Template:Piratescaribbean includes all the same information plus much, much more- the theme park ride, the three films, the characters, the locations, the ships... It was nominated for deletion a year ago, but I can't find its log. Fishies Plaice 12:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unneeded and unused, superseded by aforementioned template. --Avillia ^{(Avillia me!)} 18:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete superseded. Sophy's Duckling 19:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Fishies. -zappa.jak e (talk) 09:30, 12 July 2006 (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 page.

Template:Html unof

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. Pagra shtak 06:17, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Used in only two articles, the content would be more appropriate as a single sentence in the articles than an apparant warning template placed at the top of each. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 11:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Why should we have a massive template telling us this kind of stuff? This is not useful, things like this should be included as regular text in the articles. Mário 21:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Replace with italic text. Only subst/delete if it seems unlikely to be used on other articles (how many unofficial HTML tags are there?). --ais523 07:23, 10 July 2006 (U T C)
Delete - It was I who created the template, and it's supposed to be used together with Template talk:Html dep (for deprecated elements). But it strikes me now that there is little purpose to use the templates, since there are not that many articles that might use it. In any case, I thought I'd mention the standard status in the body text of the appropriate articles. // s4ndp4pper 10:45, 10 July 2006 (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 page.

Template:Poisonmetal

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, my knowledge of chemistry and biology tells me this isn't really a workable concept as a nav template. --Cyde↔Weys 23:27, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like someone slapped a tfd on this template but forgot to create a section here. It should be deleted because metals have varying degrees of toxicity and it's impossible to get a definitive list. —Keenan Pepper 03:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Are there some metals that are poisonous in any amount? Sophy's Duckling 19:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Yes --Brian G 00:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, nothing is poisonous in any amount. As Paracelsus said, "All things are poison and nothing (is) without poison; only the dose makes that a thing is no poison." A nanogram of mercury never hurt anyone. Also see Hormesis. —Keenan Pepper 00:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, sorry. I read that differently.... --Brian G 01:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Keenan Pepper. --Evan Robidoux 06:32, 14 July 2006 (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 page.

Template:ISBN

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, totally unnecessary. --Cyde↔Weys 23:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How worse can we get? This perform exactly the same function as typing ISBN+space+number, except with more characters. Let's burninate it with fire. Circeus 02:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extra comment The template was created as "a common mistake". While it might be, it should at the very least be kept unpopulated by a bot through substitution Circeus 12:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete per nom as media wiki software already formats this. Tim! 09:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Sophy's Duckling 19:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all text templates that take more characters to write than what they produce. Grand master ka 06:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst but keep It's the sort of thing we'd create a redirect for if it were an article, not a special piece of wikimarkup. It may be worth checking 'what links here' every so often so that it can be susbted and users who use it told the correct syntax. --ais523 07:28, 10 July 2006 (U T C)
Delete This template is just silly, as well as misleading — I've used it before, only because I didn't realize MediaWiki takes care of it automatically. ~ Booya ^Bazooka 20:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This template is just silly - indeed! Just do it! :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 07:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subst but keep It is all very well proposing to delete these things, but the nominators are rarely the ones to clean up the mess left (the vast number of links, the users who use it, etc.) Only when all the links and all users know not to use it should it be deleted. Surely we have better things to be worrying about than IMHO stupid pointless nominations like this, that will involve more work to fix than if we just left the damn thing there, taking up next to no space. FearÉIREANN\^{^(caint) 02:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is no cleanup to be done. The template is now no longer transcluded in any article. After it is deleted, any attempted usage will result in an easily-noticed and corrected redlink. I don't see the problem. ~ Booya ^Bazooka 07:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]}
Comment I checked the What Links Here, and two TfD logs show this template being deleted previously. Is this a criteria for speedy deletion, G4? Xaxafrad 05:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- More comment If it's likely this will be re-created again, shouldn't it be left here, but changed to instruct to person who added it how to use the proper tag? Xaxafrad 05:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment This template was added to Maelor Way recently. I added a notice to inform editors of the proper ISBN style. Should there be a template talk page about this or are TfD procedures laxer than AfD? Xaxafrad 03:52, 18 July 2006 (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 page.

Template:Infobox town

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 Redirect --William Allen Simpson 03:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This name should probably be for a generic template, not for a specific geography and is also redundant to Template:Infobox Town. --Brian G 02:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It must have been created by mistake. Mário 16:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Yes it was created by a 10 year old boy who also keeps creating an article about himself that keeps getting moved to various userspace pages as he uses a different account/username each time. --Brian G 00:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Template:Infobox Town. --Avillia ^{(Avillia me!)} 18:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Template:Infobox Town. Sophy's Duckling 18:57, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment How do redirects work in the template space? --Brian G 00:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - You put the redirect template down, and it will display the real template. For example, putting down {{bv}} will display the text of {{blatantvandal}}. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 01:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Avillia. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 01:22, 10 July 2006 (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 page.