Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 May 19

< May 18	May 20 >

May 19[edit]

Template:Wikiversity2[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 after adding new functionality to {{Wikiversity}} Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:37, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikiversity2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only difference between the commonly used {{Wikiversity}} is the word "at", which doesn't justify creating an own template. The Evil IP address (talk) 17:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rebuild to make it like the other sister-wiki templates that take multiple targets, so this would become useful. 70.29.210.155 (talk) 05:30, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That should be done to the master template, not to this fork. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:10, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Several sister project templates have separate templates that take one or several targets. 70.29.210.155 (talk) 04:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Maybe, but they shouldn't actually do so. It should be possible to use multiple targets automatically without the need of switching to another template. --The Evil IP address (talk) 15:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 00:24, 27 May 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:NAMCON[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) 00:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

No need to have a template that interwiki-links to our ~~naming conventions~~ article titles. It's also much easier to simple link it with usual syntax. The Evil IP address (talk) 17:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't actually see the purpose of this template. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:12, 20 May 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:LTACS[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 Substitute and delete as no longer needed and replaceable by a simple wikilink Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:35, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per the same reasons as #Template:Nasdbc. The Evil IP address (talk) 17:29, 19 May 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:Nasdbc[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 Substitute and delete as no longer needed and replaceable by a simple wikilink Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not recognizable why a specific template is needed, solely a plain user page link, used two times only, where it can be substituted. The Evil IP address (talk) 17:25, 19 May 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:See also W2[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) 00:46, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template of the former "template sharing" project, which was supposed to show links to related Wikipedia articles on Commons, but deleted there long ago. Pointless here on Wikipedia, as we're on Wikipedia already anyway, so no need for interwiki linking, and templates like {{Main}} or {{See also}} should be used (and are already) to make sure the formatting can easier be maintained. The Evil IP address (talk) 17:17, 19 May 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:Karen Staley[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 as a G2 Test Page. Editor appears to have attempted to link to Karen Staley, but used braces instead. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 17:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Karen Staley (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

It does not appear this template will be used in any useful way, the content of the template is the template page name itself. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 16:28, 19 May 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:Cheshire Senior Cup seasons[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) 00:31, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cheshire Senior Cup seasons (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The first issue is that the content does not reflect the title. There is already a template called Template:Liverpool Senior Cup seasons for this content. I could not find any season articles for the Cheshire Senior Cup, only the main Cheshire Senior Cup article, hence this navbox is not needed. Jameboy (talk) 11:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Jameboy (talk) 11:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The content of the template doesn't reflect its title and there are no articles that this navbox could conceivably link together. – Pee Jay 11:36, 19 May 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.