Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 July 21

< July 20	July 22 >

July 21[edit]

Template:US historical outlines[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 section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:US historical outlines (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Because of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of Louisiana history, only the main US outline still exists. Seems irrelevant now. Ricky81682 (talk) 18:55, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The state historical outlines have been merged whole into the state outlines. They all still exist, but they are now the history sections of the state outlines. Buaidh (talk) 13:21, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So you would want redirect to particular sections of the state outlines articles? Why duplicate Template:US outlines for particular subsection of the outlines themselves? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:53, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as they no longer exist (per nom), and because of the inherent problem of "outlines" in general, and the pointlessness of metametameta-level navigation aids (especially to non-existant pages). Verbal chat 21:23, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no longer useful, having no links. Axem Titanium (talk) 10:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No longer useful, as not different from Template:US outlines. Karanacs (talk) 12:53, 27 July 2010 (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:Merge Anime/Manga[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 section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Merge Anime/Manga (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphaned unused template. Ricky81682 (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Where to even start with this one. I guess Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 43#Fictional character sorting can give you more background behind the creation of this aborted template. To sum it up, one editor didn't like the fact that two character AfDs were going to result in a merge to a list article. He then insisted that the editors at WP:ANIME drop everything they were doing and immediately cleanup/merge/delete all character articles within the project's scope. He then created this specialized merge template because flipping a parameter on in the project's banner which categorized the article as proposed merge was too much trouble. To say the least, none of this had any support from the project members and the template was soon forgotten. —Farix (t | c) 11:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Meh. This thing. Unused, unneeded given other templates, not wanted = delete. —Quasirandom (talk) 13:59, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Redundant to general merge templates. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 22:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unused and no consensus for use by the anime/manga project or anyone else. -- AnmaFinotera (talk ~ contribs) 04:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, use the main merge template. Axem Titanium (talk) 10:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this template is not really used by the anime/manga project as it was a failed proposal. Regular merge tags make this tag un-needed. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If the project it was designed for doesn't want to use it, there's no point in keeping it around. Reach Out to the Truth 00:05, 29 July 2010 (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:Related changes[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 section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

long-unused and obsolete. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 16:42, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, deprecated. Axem Titanium (talk) 10:39, 23 July 2010 (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:NestTextColors[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 section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems to have been created for the sole purpose to making one user's userpage look pretty. It has extremely limited use and weird formatting like this could be considered disruptive during discussions. Axem Titanium (talk) 09:40, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Seems like we deleted a similarly named template recently. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 22:12, 22 July 2010 (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:Macedonian organizations[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 section.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 21:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Macedonian organizations (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template is redundant to Template:Macedonian diaspora organisations. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:12, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, redundant. Axem Titanium (talk) 10:40, 23 July 2010 (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:The Powerpuff Girls[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 section.

The result of the discussion was No consensus Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Powerpuff Girls (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Genndy Tartakovsky (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:The Powerpuff Girls with Template:Genndy Tartakovsky.
The Powerpuff Girls navbox has so few links that they fit on one line. As the Powerpuff Girls section on the Genndy Tartakovsky navbox already takes up a line, the Powerpuff Girls navbox can be easily merged into the Genndy Tartakovsky navbox. Neelix (talk) 23:08, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:41, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nominator, obvious solution here. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 18:35, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Agreed. Good idea. Jhenderson777 (talk) 22:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose What happens to the Powerpuff girls Animated Series, and Anime episodes then? The current nav box is also currently listed under Craig McCracken the show's creator and the nav box is better left alone as I feel it should br for a franchise and not put under someone who did not create the show to begin with. I also found out that including Genndy Tartakovsky, the powerpuff girls was directed by 7 diffrent people during it's run including craig himself and Genndy had no part in even making the powerpuff girls movie. So in the end if this merge were to take place, the section powerpuff girls would appear under just one of the directors name: Genndy Tartakovsky and under his name a link to all the episodes not all of which he directed, a link to a list of characters he did not have a full hand in creating, and a link to a movie he had no part in. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the templates are not the same nor would it be appropriate to merge them. The Powerpuff Girls template has enough templates to be its own template, and it is a template about the series links. The Tartakovsky template needs to be fixed to remove the episode/character/etc links, which have nothing to do with him personally. As with any "director", his template should just be for the main series page and not every subpage related to that series. -- AnmaFinotera (talk ~ contribs) 05:03, 23 July 2010 (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.