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 page.

The result of the debate was deletion. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 05:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox TradeWars Ship (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Template was orphaned by this AFD. Also, nature of template fundamentally includes game guide levels of information. Serpent's Choice 08:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep, but tag deprecated. Deleting will break the histories of the redirected pages. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 02:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Is that actually a problem in this case? The articles were redirected essentially in lieu of deletion as unencyclopedic game guide material. Is there a need to preserve templates that were used in their history? If so, can we ever delete a template that was used as a substantive part of an article's history? Serpent's Choice 04:15, 2 January 2007 (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 page.

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 page.

The result of the debate was Delete. Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 22:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WindowHome (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

WindowHome template is widely used in Italian Wikipedia. I found nothing similar in English one. Of course, if any is available, I will be glad to use it. Otherwise I would appreciate if you could keep it. Thank you in advance.--Dejudicibus 14:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This template was already deleted on October 11, 2006 per TfD at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 October 3. You may want to raise the issue with Wikipedia's Deletion Review process. Neil916 (Talk) 16:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I see you've already found that. Neil916 (Talk) 17:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Close, listed here in error. Neil916 (Talk) 17:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC) Nominator was actually arguing to keep the template, not delete it, should have been listed at WP:DRV. Neil916 (Talk) 16:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I restored the template temporarily. I recommend keeping this discussion open and if the editor doesn't advertise the template as I suggested, substing the uses on his user page and deleting the template. This is a potentially good idea, but it has to find more widespread usage. ~ trialsanderrors 06:37, 28 December 2006 (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 page.

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 page.

The result of the debate was Delete. Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 22:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Noclick (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This template isn't currently used, and moreover it's a dangerous CSS hack. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability/Clickable images for more info about its problems. The same applies to Template:Wikisourcesmall, which is also nominated for deletion below. Thanks --surueña 21:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom —Quiddity 21:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete of course, seeing as I nominated ((click)) for the same reasons. Hopefully a less used template will actually be deleted... -Amarkov ^blah_edits 22:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — Omegatron 03:35, 2 January 2007 (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 page.

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 page.

The result of the debate was Delete. Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 22:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikisourcesmall (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This template isn't currently used, and moreover it's a dangerous CSS hack. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability/Clickable images for more info about its problems. The same applies to Template:Noclick, which is also nominated for deletion above. Thanks --surueña 21:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom —Quiddity 21:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above discussion. -Amarkov ^blah_edits 22:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, there's no context where this would be preferable to something else. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 06:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — Omegatron 03:34, 2 January 2007 (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 page.