Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 April 10

< April 9	April 11 >

April 10

Template:Infobox Book series

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 section.

The result of the discussion was merge with Template:Infobox Novel series. JPG-GR (talk) 22:50, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Book series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to Template:Infobox Novel series and complete lack of documentation makes it exceedingly difficult to use. Seems to offer nothing more or better over the more widely used Novel series box, and it is only used on very small number of articles, added by its creator. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I supposed I am somewhat biased, as the creator of {{Infobox Novel series}}, but I believe the latter is better as it is much more consistent with {{Infobox Book}}, and somewhat easier to use. Mr. Absurd (talk) 21:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. This is actually the more obvious and logical title, so we should merge its parameters into {{Infobox Novel series}}. That's a far simpler outcome than having to go edit all of its transclusions anyway. I'll start on this right away; once this template is deleted, {{Infobox Novel series}} should be moved over it. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:30, 15 April 2009 (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:Drive season 1

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 section.

The result of the discussion was delete --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 11:04, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Drive season 1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not used in any article. Series ended two years ago after six episodes, so no chance of expansion. Template previously listed episode articles, all of which are now redirected to the main article for the series. Sarilox (talk) 20:11, 10 April 2009 (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 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). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 11:06, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite review (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not used in any articles; previously deleted in Septebmer 2008 (Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_September_20#Template:Cite_review. –Dream out loud (talk) 17:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete -- not even a cite anymore, just a particular review citation --William Allen Simpson (talk) 20:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This appears to be a mistaken edit, probably from a misunderstanding of our citation system. Not useful for transclusion. — Gavia immer (talk) 17:47, 11 April 2009 (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:redirect10

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 section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Template is redundant to Redirect8. Check this example -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Redirect10 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Delete -- Confusing to several editors. All 8 uses were incorrect: several hatnotes were indicating the redirect of a misspelling (such as "Children of Isreal" instead of "Israel"), and even 1 that was trying to synthesize {{otherusesof}} by adding its component parts! Now, no longer used. --William Allen Simpson (talk) 16:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep can be used in combination with the {{for}} template, to compose two or more other meanings for the redirect. (though more than two, a dab page should be built) 70.29.213.241 (talk) 08:07, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unused and useless. Saying "X redirects here." without further detail is completely redundant and could theoretically be used on any page. With respect to the comment above, there are other templates for such uses, specifically {{redirect4}}, {{redirect5}}, {{redirect6}} and {{redirect8}}. PC78 (talk) 12:15, 12 April 2009 (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:Serart

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 section.

The result of the discussion was delete --Magioladitis (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Serart (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is not needed as it reflects information already covered in another template. The template is for a single album, and not for something such as a band with a full discography. The article, Serart, does therefore not need a template for these reasons. FallenWings47 (talk) 16:26, 10 April 2009 (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:BBAC

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 section.

The result of the discussion was delete. This is almost a complete copy of an already deleted template. --User:Woohookitty ^{Diamming fool!} 11:11, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BBAC (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:BAC (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Together, these two represent a recreation of the black British template deleted at Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_January_27#UK_census_ethnic_groups. Once again, they try to map country of birth on to ethnicity based on the census, which is problematic since there is no stable link between the two. For example, the black African template includes South Africans, but many South Africans aren't black. Plus, what about the black people born in the UK? This template suggests that they were all born abroad. Also, the UK census form is completed by the respondent and they can chose to categorise themselves into whichever ethnicity grouping they choose, regardless of country of birth or nationality. I originally nominated these for speedy deletion as recreations, but User:Stevvvv4444 objected so I decided to bring them here instead. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:31, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Also, recreating deleted templates falls under the criteria for speedy deletion. Middayexpress (talk) 20:11, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I know, but since User:Stevvvv4444 objected so much, I thought I'd better bring it here. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:25, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Stong Keep Obviously every nation on earth has a mix of different ethnic groups, but the fact of the matter is that the majority of people from the countries in these templates belong to the Black African ethnic group. Although there are some large numbers of South Asian Africans in the UK, Tanzania etc are still Sub-Saharan/Black African nations. It is like not allowing Saudis to be put under a template of Arabs as some are Filipino. I protest even stronger about the African-Caribbean template, I have ensured to to put nations with say Latino/Hispanic majority populations in. I really don't see how this template is a problem or why they (Barbadians, Trinidadians etc) can be denied from being put in the Afro-Caribbean template. They are all nations from the Caribbean, all with Black majority populations, this template and the main ethnic group article itself are the only things on Wikipedia to link these closely related groups. If you still object, which is ridiculous, maybe the template could be renamed or contain the text 'please note, not ever person from the coresponding nation are of Black-African origin'. Stevvvv4444 (talk) 12:30, 16 April 2009 (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:Pwcotw notice

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 section.

The result of the discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 22:08, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pwcotw notice (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Old template, it's apparently "screwed up" already, and it serves no value to the relevant WikiProject anymore. Ra agg io 05:58, 10 April 2009 (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.