Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 October 1
October 1
[edit]
CSD reference templates
[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 substitution. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:20, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
- Template:Csdref-a3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-a7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-a8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-c1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-c2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-c3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g10 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-g9 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-i1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-i2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-i3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-i4 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-i5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-i6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-i7 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-i8 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-i9 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-p1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-p2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-r1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-r2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-r3 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-t1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Csdref-u1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Category:CSD reference templates (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
These templates never seem to have gotten any significant use, and I believe some are misleading with respect to the actual CSD (e.g. "unremarkable subject (CSD A7)", "suspected copyright infringement (CSD I9)", and "empty category (CSD C1)"). Moreover, they can be replaced by simple links to the appropriate CSD sections.
I created most or all of these templates using an old account, so I could have requested deletion under WP:CSD#G7. However, these templates have been around for years, so I had mentioned them on WT:CSD and now bring them here for discussion. PleaseStand (talk) 21:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. Quite potentially useful, but simply not used. (If kept, they need to be updated for the image->file changeover.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 12:25, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- Subst and delete. They've been used a little, so deleting them immediately would produce a little confusion in archives. However, keeping utility templates is pointless when nobody thinks that they have some utility. Nyttend (talk) 22:53, 6 October 2012 (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) 04:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
There is already a template (Template:I-League) which gives you the names of all 14 I-League clubs and much more information. Cheers. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 00:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
- delete, redundant. Frietjes (talk) 17:13, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, redundant, there is also this template Template:2012-13 in Indian football that can include this one. Stigni (talk) 19:07, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- What! No! 2012-13 in Indian football is a normal yearly (seasonal) template. Why does it need to be deleted? If this is deleted then there are plenty of "2012-13 in [Insert country] football" that should be deleted as well. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 19:35, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- Maybe you don't understand what I want to say. Template:I-League 2012-13 is in the intersection of Template:I-League and Template:2012-13 in Indian football, so it is redundant and useless. Stigni (talk) 19:42, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- So (Just to be clear) your saying that the "2012-13 in Indian Football" and obviously "I-League" templates should stay but "I-League 2012-13" template be deleted for being useless. If so then I agree. Cheers. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 19:57, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- Maybe you don't understand what I want to say. Template:I-League 2012-13 is in the intersection of Template:I-League and Template:2012-13 in Indian football, so it is redundant and useless. Stigni (talk) 19:42, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- What! No! 2012-13 in Indian football is a normal yearly (seasonal) template. Why does it need to be deleted? If this is deleted then there are plenty of "2012-13 in [Insert country] football" that should be deleted as well. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 19:35, 13 October 2012 (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.