< May 29 May 31 >

May 30, 2006

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 keep. - Mailer Diablo 15:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Greens[edit]

Template:Greens (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This template serves no real purpose but to spam Green related articles. Delete Ardenn 21:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're right (though is green philosophy on the same level as Anarchism and Fascism - which have symbols but are both fringe movements - or should it more resemble the liberalism and conservatism infoboxes, which, like the greens, are actively involved in the political process?) While I think the box looks sleeker and more serious without an image, perhaps a symbol, such as the recylcing symbol (Image:Recycle001.svg) would work. In any case, a meadow full of flowers isn't really in keeping with any of the other templates on political philosophy. - Nhprman 16:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Please explain why you believe it was nominated in bad faith. I didn't detect that, but maybe I missed something, and maybe the nominator should be asked to explain his motivations better if that's the case. - Nhprman 04:20, 1 June 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 redirect to Template:User wikipedia/Counter Vandalism Unit. - Mailer Diablo 15:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User SCVF[edit]

Template:User SCVF (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Unencyclopaedic, part of a dead project. Rory096 18:14, 30 May 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. - Mailer Diablo 15:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tvtome[edit]

Template:Tvtome (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template was superseded by ((tvtome person)) and ((tvtome show)). It's no longer in use, and it only works confusing for people. TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 13:07, 30 May 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 -- Drini 22:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox synopsis[edit]

Template:Infobox synopsis (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) An attempt to provide a box for article summaries, but the discussion on the talk page established that lead sections should be used for that instead of yet another box. Has been orphaned. Zocky | picture popups 12:55, 30 May 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. - Mailer Diablo 15:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ACF-Fiorentina and Template:Gazeta-Sporturilor[edit]

Template:ACF-Fiorentina (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and Template:Gazeta-Sporturilor (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Both of these were created for use on images to suggest that all rights to the images had been released. Checking the websites linked to from these templates does not bear this claim out. All images tagged with these templates have now been deleted as copyright violations. Angr (talk) 09:24, 30 May 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 keep. With 20 times more editors asking for it to be kept than for it to be deleted, and many, many more users than normal having voiced their opinions in this TFD, it is quite clear what the consensus is, and it is not for deletion. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 20:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Portal[edit]

Template:Portal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Last TfD
Complete violation of Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and encyclopedias don't talk about themselves. The template is also a GFDL violation. (Note that I couldn't put the TfD notice on the template itself because the code is so complicated, so it's on the talk.) Rory096 05:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added the notice to the template. --CBDunkerson 11:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pwzn0re

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. IceKarmaॐ 22:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Legal disclaimer[edit]

Template:Legal disclaimer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This template is self-referential and in any event in contravention of Wikipedia:No disclaimer templates; inasmuch as the template is used only twice (once in mainspace), its existence but absence from nearly every page to which it could be appended surely invites one salient objection from NDT, viz., that The lack of the disclaimer on a page might open Wikipedia to lawsuits. Hence, delete. Joe 02:44, 30 May 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. - Mailer Diablo 15:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mario vs. DK series[edit]

Template:Mario vs. DK series (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Barely a series; not enough games to warrant being separate from a Donkey Kong template or a Mario template. A Link to the Past (talk) 02:11, 30 May 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 保留 - Mailer Diablo 15:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pan-blue and Pan-green Userboxes[edit]

Template:User Pan-blue (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User Pan-green (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This Userbox is polemic. Both Pan-Blue and Pan-Green are big parts of Taiwanese politics, and that's why there are articles for both of them. However, they do not belong in Userboxes as they are polemic and divisive. Also, consider the fact that both ((User CCP)) and ((User CCP-0)) have been deleted. Hong Qi Gong 01:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But both Pan-Green and Pan-Blue are NOT political parties. They are political coalitions that happen to include multiple political parties. Hong Qi Gong 03:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There's a userbox for the United Left Coalition of Spain. The NP and PFP are offshoots of the KMT, and I don't really see any reason why political coalitions, especially the ones as tightly united as the ones in Taiwan, are not allowed. We need to see the CCP deletion page so we can understand what happened in that page. BlueShirts 03:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've posted here about the CCP deletion - Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Template:User_CCP. Hong Qi Gong 03:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, this is a speedy delete looking at the clearout of political userboxes. - Hahnchen 04:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Just a procedural note, this isn't a "vote" in any sense of the word, it's a discussion. As this link notes, saying (in effect) "I like it. Keep it" is not an effective discussion point because it does not address Wikipedia policies. What does, for example, is saying that the deletion of the CCP template set a precedent, and the argument to keep these got far weaker after that was decided. Also, as noted above, Divisive political topics AS TEMPLATES are not in keeping with Wikipedia's mission and the role of templates is not to act as political rallying points, as these clearly are (if these templates are transfered to User space, that's a bit different.) So if the Administrator closing this Tfd debate is fair, he/she will not simply "count up the votes" (though that often happens) but will weigh the policies I've cited and others here, and make a decision. - Nhprman 04:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you don't agree with a TfD, you could always bring it up at Wikipedia:Deletion review, if it hasn't been already... --Disavian 05:41, 2 June 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. 這個討論已經结束。请不要对这个存档做任何编辑。
More