Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 October 7

< October 6	October 8 >

October 7

Template:Joe's Roadtrip Character

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. WOSlinker (talk) 20:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Joe's Roadtrip Character (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only used by one user in their own userspace pages. WOSlinker (talk) 22:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There must be a more generic template that could be used instead of this. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Redundant to {{Infobox character}}. PC78 (talk) 21:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agree with above ((Luka govisky (talk) 21:51, 11 October 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:Doctor Who book character

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. WOSlinker (talk) 20:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Doctor Who book character (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused character infobox WOSlinker (talk) 22:20, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to {{Doctor Who character}}. --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 00:30, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No redirect is necessary since it is unused, and it's not hard to find the more generic template. 134.253.26.6 (talk) 16:52, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There must be a more generic template that could be used instead of this. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Unused and redundant to {{Infobox character}}. PC78 (talk) 21:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant ((Luka govisky (talk) 21:53, 11 October 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:Mars trilogy character

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. WOSlinker (talk) 20:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mars trilogy character (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused character infobox WOSlinker (talk) 22:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nominator. --Bsherr (talk) 14:50, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There must be a more generic template that could be used instead of this. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Unused and redundant to {{Infobox character}}. PC78 (talk) 21:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant ((Luka govisky (talk) 21:53, 11 October 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:2010 AIK IF exhibition game schedule

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 (G7). Hey Mid (contributions) 17:14, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2010 AIK IF exhibition game schedule (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template only used on a single page, pretty much making it useless. The information can be added within the relevant article. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 12:12, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Single use template. -DJSasso (talk) 12:47, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can see a couple of articles (Södertälje SK and Luleå HF) where this template could potentially be used. Are there likely to be more exhibition games as the new season gets underway, or are exhibition games a "pre-season" thing? In case it's not obvious, I know nothing about ice-hockey... TFOWR 12:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The template is specific to the games played by one team. Yes the other teams played games against AIK but they are not the focus of this template so it wouldn't really be appropriate to list all the games AIK played on the pages of other teams. (except of course the ones they were involved in). -DJSasso (talk) 14:11, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah, understood. Thanks. Well, given the author's comment below - subst, then delete. TFOWR 14:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As the author of the template, there are a few advantages with using templates, even if it is a single-use template, mainly categorization and doc pages. So I don't really see any reason as to deleting it. On the other hand, if delete, it can be easily substed and then deleted, no problem. Hey Mid (contributions) 14:06, 7 October 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:Montana cities and mayors of 100,000 population

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. Solid consensus following the creator's removal of his/her opposing view. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Montana cities and mayors of 100,000 population (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Because Montana only has one city with more than 100,000 people, this navbox only has one entry (one city and one mayor, each of which should link to the other in their text, well above the navbox), and there's not a reasonable chance that another will be added. There's really no point in having a navbox with just one entry, since it's useless for navigation. Nyttend (talk) 11:53, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see there are similar navboxes for other (but not all) US states, and more could be added to this one if the population threshold was lowered, but this all seems rather arbitrary to me (if not dubious), so I'm going with delete. PC78 (talk) 00:42, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Meaningless navbox. Perhaps there are few enough mayors in Montana that all mayors could be in a single navbox? Arsenikk ^(talk) 15:38, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Arbitrary distinction. --Bsherr (talk) 14:46, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not enough info for a template. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:10, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete meaningless ((Luka govisky (talk) 21:55, 11 October 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:FULLFULLPAGENAME

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. WOSlinker (talk) 06:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is already the magic words that you can use {{FULLPAGENAME}}. Why do we need this template? -Porchcrop ^{(talk|contributions)} 04:55, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe read the template docs to find out? <grin> Rich Farmbrough, 05:04, 7 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Comment Doesn't seem very well used though. -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:11, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Decidedly limited usage, confusing syntax, and relatively simple under the hood. It isn't worth the trouble. --N Y Kevin @235, i.e. 04:37, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unused. --Bsherr (talk) 14:50, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete really? seems to be useless ((Luka govisky (talk) 21:55, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It seems to act as {{FULLPAGENAME}} both with and without a parameter. There appears to be no difference between {{FULLPAGENAME}} and this one. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 251° 58' 0" NET 16:47, 13 October 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:Xinjiang Flag

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. WOSlinker (talk) 06:59, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Xinjiang Flag (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, erroneous title, and no apparent need. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Unused, and it's not a flag. PC78 (talk) 11:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete just not a flag Hongdx (talk) 21:42, 11 October 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:Joan Pedrola in Ad Campaigns

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. The existence of other similar templates is irrelevent in this discussion. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Joan Pedrola in Ad Campaigns (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unnecessary. Template doesn't link to any specific works, just a few companies the model has worked for. The article body can (and does) easily handle this. Only three other similar templates have been created - Template:Jon Kortajarena in Ad Campaigns, Template:Marina Perez in Ad Campaigns, Template:River Viiperi in Ad Campaigns - so it becoming a real system is doubtful. Throw in templates on magazine covers and runway shows to complete the modeling career trinity and you have template clutter. It's a somewhat intriguing idea for models whose careers span too many credits to list in their articles, but even then, there are certain ELs that cover that. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 00:47, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete misuse of a navbox. Joan Pedrola being in a single campaign is not a defining aspect of these huge companies. Arsenikk ^(talk) 15:40, 8 October 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:Una Healy

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. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Una Healy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Here is the criticism I like to make to this template, all leading to the reason why I am nominating this template for deletion.

The article about her EP have been sucessfully AfDed for failing notability guidelines for EPs, albums and songs, also it was released by Ms Healy, prior to her fame with her group...but then plenty of famous musicians have released albums prior to their fame and how many of their pre-fame albums ever get an article of their own, not unless it has meets Wikipedia guidelines, therefore this now leaves one redlink.
Guest appearances in a TV show does not make a single member or groups notable, it is a common practice for famous performers, actors, entertainers or celebrities to guest appear on TV shows.
Two of those linked redirects to the main articles.
A discography for Ms Healy linked only consists of one non-notable EP and three albums that is released as part of the band, therefore that would not be worthy of being listed.
To somebody like myself, who have no knowledge of her and her group, what has X Factor got to do with Ms Healy.
Is it necessary to list a HAB (Husbands and Boyfriends) in this category, I'm not an expert on the group, never a fan of showbiz gossip nor am I ever a Heat reader therefore I cannot judge on this, so the question is how notable are their relationship compared to somebody like Brangelina, TomKat, Posh and Becks or on a lesser scale compaed to those mentioned, Joe and Cheryl Cole.
The record label listed is only contracted to her group not to her solo career.

I think that a template for her group, which already exists, is more appropriate than one for herself making this template pointless, therefore I recommend a deletion. Donnie Park (talk) 00:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC) Donnie Park (talk) 00:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Hardly a useful template. Anemone Projectors 00:43, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Navbox for The Saturdays is sufficient, I think. She really hasn't done enough on her own to warrant a seperate template. PC78 (talk) 00:45, 8 October 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.