Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 January 21

< January 20	January 22 >

January 21

Film "needs" templates

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) 19:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Film needs cast section (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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

Template:Film needs synopsis (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated talk page templates no longer transcluded on any pages, thanks to a recent run of AnomieBOT which replaced them with newer coding without any loss of categorization. All three have been superseded by respective parameters within the larger {{Film}} project banner. Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 06:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. PC78 (talk) 16:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I was following the bot process, and it was raised that WP:FILM prefers the archiving of templates rather than their deletion. Does WP:Film have an "official" opinion on this (e.g. archive then delete)? The flipside would be, are there other cupboards that need clearing? Hope that makes sense! - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 20:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I assumed that to be the case based on existing practise, but if there is truly no value in keeping then (as seems to be the case here) then there's no reason to keep them. No doubt there are a few others that could be deleted as well. PC78 (talk) 13:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think that was a misinterpretation. We do have an archive template for things, but usually it's for old departments and talk pages where retaining the material has historical interest. Templates don't usually qualify, and precedent already exists for deleting deprecated templates (such as the needs infobox one). Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 21:34, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above - deprecated and obsolete. Terraxos (talk) 23:52, 27 January 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:Makelist

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) 19:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused template with little obvious utility. —G716 <^T·_C> 06:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, there is nothing here which can't be done with regular wiki markup. --Eastlaw (talk) 15:12, 21 January 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:Makelist (repetitive)

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) 19:04, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Makelist (repetitive) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template. —G716 <^T·_C> 06:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, there is nothing here which can't be done with regular wiki markup. --Eastlaw (talk) 15:12, 21 January 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:Rwc

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) 19:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused template with no apparent value —G716 <^T·_C> 06:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, duplicative of other templates, and rather ugly as well. --Eastlaw (talk) 15:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per above. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 20:22, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we have {{Articleissues}} for this. Terraxos (talk) 23:51, 27 January 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.