Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 July 9
July 9
[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 Speedy Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:34, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- Template:MediaWiki.org (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
It is only used on a single page (Talk:MediaWiki) currently and its functionality could easily be replicated on that one page using Template:Notice. FunPika 21:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- That's fine, if you don't mind cluttering up the talk page with all that stuff, when it could be reduced to a single line. I've requested speedy deletion per G7. Tisane talk/stalk 22:36, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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) 16:58, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
- Template:Seoul landmarks (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
"Landmark" is a fairly subjective term. Not sure how they qualify as "landmarks". Jyusin (talk) 04:50, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- Delete before an official criteria is given. If it is found, this template should be changed. - Chugun (talk) 12:35, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep per useful navbox. Regarding subjective criteria: any off-WP criteria just pushes the subjective term one step further away and any on-WP criteria can be discussed at respectively template's talk page (there are numerous templates like this one). jonkerz♠ 23:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- Comment Please note that countless other city articles contain a template identifying their 'landmarks'. Just run a search on 'Template:Landmarks' and see the results; alternatively, just click on this link. If this template is deleted, it would have to be taken that the motion is also to delete almost every other template on city landmarks - as none of those have a criteria themselves. The only quality template on city landmarks I have found so far is the one on Chicago. You may find it here; in fact, the template leads to sub-templates of landmarks divided by type. And the landmarks are listed only because the city/state/federal government has listed them. Perhaps we can use the Chicago one as a model template. Do take note. Thanks, AngChenrui (talk) 08:08, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 Redirect and merge, no prejudice against nominating the redirect at RFD. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:33, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
- Template:Images needed (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Currently used only on one article, redundant to {{Reqphoto}}. Svick (talk) 14:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, about time we started reducing the number of these templates. --Traveler100 (talk) 15:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- Merge. The wording and links of this template provide clearer, more apposite guidance than those of
{{Reqphoto}}, which is vague and much less helpful. —Scheinwerfermann T·C21:47, 10 July 2010 (UTC) - Merge This is an article template, "reqphoto" is a talk template. 76.66.192.55 (talk) 07:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
- Modify. There should be a template to request an additional photo in a file that does not have enough images, such as this one. Bwrs (talk) 20:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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) 00:20, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Unused subtemplate of a redirected template Plastikspork (talk) 14:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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) 00:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Template's purpose has been subsumed into Template:St. Louis Cardinals, which contains the season list as a subsection. Dewelar (talk) 03:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- 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.