September 20
- 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 Keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Lu (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
It's almost the same as Template:Ln and it's talkpage redirects to Template talk:Ln, so I believe it should be merged with Ln. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 23:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep that's what all the templates do! (
((la)), ((lt)), ((lw)), ((lc)), ((lp)), ((lh)), and ((lb))). The talk page redirects to centralize discussion. It's regularly used at WP:RFPP along with the other templates listed. If someone's up to merging all of them, I'd say go for it, but I think it's unnecessary at the moment. Airplaneman ✈ 23:24, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - It would be interesting if a new template detected namespace and represented it accordingly. But that's not a reason to eliminate this template. --Bsherr (talk) 23:42, 20 September 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.
- 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) 02:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I don't think this template is anything significant at all and don't think it should warrant a template. 202.10.95.74 (talk) 08:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Unimportant category. --Bsherr (talk) 16:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete – completely unnecessary template. Not significant and I would label it cruft. Jenks24 (talk) 17:36, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - It is not important to know in any of these articles that other players in other years reached an arbitrary score. Resolute 05:22, 26 September 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.