< January 14 January 16 >

January 15

Template:Serbia portal/Featured article

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 deleteCryptic 23:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Serbia portal/Featured article (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Template seems to be no longer in use; its "proper place" in Portal:Serbia seems to be occupied by Portal:Serbia/Featured article. No transclusions. EdGl 23:56, 15 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.

Template:UODucksCoach

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. —Cryptic 23:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Has been duplicated by ((OregonDucksCoach)) No transclusions. -- PSUMark2006 talk | contribs 23:04, 15 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.

Template:Boolnand

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. —Cryptic 22:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Has been deprecated with the introduction of ParserFunctions, and has been marked as such since September. No active uses. --^demon[omg plz] 21:34, 15 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.

Template:Introduction1

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. —Cryptic 22:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Introduction1 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Has been deprecated since September, only incoming links are from talk pages. No transclusions. --^demon[omg plz] 21:34, 15 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.

Template:Policy2

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. —Cryptic 22:53, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Policy2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Has been deprecated since September, only incoming links are from talk pages. No transclusions. --^demon[omg plz] 21:34, 15 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.

Template:Infobox Fan's Club

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. —Cryptic 22:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Fan's Club (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This is redundant for any football club template. This user seems to be using pages as sandbox. --Obina 21:19, 15 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.

Template:Monique (futurama / all my circuits 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. —Cryptic 22:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Monique (futurama / all my circuits character) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Apparently a template created for a very minor character from Futurama, I feel relatively sure it is not used anywhere at all and doesn't appear to serve any purpose. --Stardust8212 20:43, 15 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.

Template:Greene

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 no consensus. —Cryptic 22:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Given that Wikipedia:Esperanza is now inactive, I see no reason why this needs to remain in template space. It can only serve to perpetuate the divide that existed prior to the MfD for that project. --Agent 86 20:41, 15 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.

Template:Madhouse Records albums

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. —Cryptic 22:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Madhouse Records albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Evidently a category mistakenly created as a template. Identical content exists at Cat:Madhouse Records albums. --Unint 15:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Can't we speedy delete this? Effectively unused, and pointless. The JPStalk to me 17:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We don't need a template to point to a category. Robert A.West (Talk) 00:22, 17 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.

Template:'Allo 'Allo! episode

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. —Cryptic 22:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:'Allo 'Allo! episode (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Unused. Also, as with other similar deletions, this is redundant to ((Infobox Television episode)). We should be consistent, which is easier on the servers. The JPStalk to me 14:07, 15 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.

Template:Infobox Bottom

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. —Cryptic 22:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

As with other recent similar deletions, this is redundant to ((Infobox Television episode)). We should be consistent, which is easier on the servers. The JPStalk to me 13:55, 15 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.

Template:Interwikitmp-grp

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. —Cryptic 22:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Interwikitmp-grp (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Renominate this tempalate, as it has no use in it's current format, for example on ((tlx)) it's broken. AzaToth 12:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Interjected out-of-timeline
based on discussion lower down

Speedy Keep, this template is one of a set used to autocategorize, tag and flag templates maintained here where there is a large template savvy staff with vast experience and knowledge and aggressive anti-vandalism patrolling. These are used to cross connect template spaces for tools templates useful across sister's, mainly originating here, but ported and disemenated to our sister projects using the same category scheme. Templates tagged thus and updated are supposed to have the improvements transmitted across sisters.

   (1)) It cannot be 'broken' as if the nom. hadn't seen it, on tlx, then it would have been broken by failing to deliver the links and that message.

   (2) The auto-categorizing is also working,

   (3) There did appear to be a busted link in the Meta linking sub-template, most likely introduced by a BOT--that has happened before.

   (4) If there is part of this malfunctioning, such as a link to a sister, it's more likely something not yet in place (not yet ported, which has not yet proceeded systematically, but instead at need, tagging of general tools not yet taking place pending discussion with the Meta 'Communications committee'--for cross language consideration.). The exception to that was wiktionary (which wants no uppercase first names, as offensive to their NAMCON), hence the project failed TfD as no one notified me it was in progress.

   (5) Furthering the project has been on hold, save for some time circa Christmas prepetory to shrinking and condensing the notification display, as I had very pressing real life matters to deal with last fall, and am just getting back and up to speed on wikiwork.

   (6) Prioritizing time for that continuation is currently somewhat bogged down by mediations needs, but it is on my to-do list. Best regards. // FrankB 21:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problme I see it is that it's telling us that a sister project "has" the template, but given on ((tlx)), wikibooks and wikisource hasn't the template, and the link to a template on meta is broken. Also, what project is it you are talking about? AzaToth 22:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's covered by likely something not yet in place, as in not ported to that sister. The last time you tagged it for deletion coincided with the end of a major redesign and revision, which changes were limited and promulgated to only select sites and pages thereon--I was flat out of time. Then I had to disappear, but made sure the fundamental parts were functional and working before doing so... that cost me two consecutive all-nighters, which are nothing to the young, but costly to someone like me in my fifties.

  Since furthering the project will take an additional big chunk of time, it's enqued, catching up on various things and mediating have priority. Feel free to copy over whatever template is not there... you'll save me the trouble. If written properly, even the help translates over without changes.
Ah, but unhelpful to whom, under what circumstances?

Hope that clarifies things. // FrankB 03:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Important Post dated note
Subsequent experience has shown the template to cause a server loading issue when modified since it's hooked into so many tools templates on so many pages. It is therefore imperative to hook it in using WP:DPP (Template doc page pattern) when used, in which case, the exact place it manifests in the template page documentation can be chosen to be unobtrusive and non-interfering quite easily. // FrankB 17:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  
Xpost
Fm ((Ut|Ligulem}... a wider perspective:

   I'm open to suggestions that satisfy the basic goals of such tagging, as I just elaborated upon, but this is not a shallow 'I'm-only-interested-in-my-backyard-thing', but one which should help conserve funds for the foundation on all it's projects. The alternative to one small descendent of this iterim template is individual tagging by the individual templates for the sister's using same. That would clutter up the tools templates far more than the one small line imposed by this arrary or it's targeted autocategorization versions, so I chose the array of impliementation, though on some templates where there is a naming collision requiring a work-around (e.g. 'tl' vice 'TL', 'Cat' vs. 'Cat', etc.). CBD has been helping me focus this all along, and perhaps if my last post isn't convincing to you, you might ask his take on it. Bottom line, the tagging will have benefits on interwiki production and conserving editor's time. The benefits here are small, the benefits 'there' are important. Most sites can't spend a lot of man-hours reinventing the wheels we already have entrenched and debugged versions of, and then they haven't the personel to police anti-vandalism needs.

  Even with all our personnel, our system relies on watchlists which are a very weak link if one goes away from wiki for a while. This system at least provides for a fast link to a source template where the A/V patrolling is much more vigorous and more highly manned. Best regards // FrankB 04:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sister projects using this
template or an equivalent
Metawiki See  (({link))}
Wikipedia See (({link))}
Commons See (({link))}
Wiktionary See (({link))}
Wikibooks See (({link))}
Wikiquote See (({link))}
Wikisource See (({link))}
Wikinews See (({link))}
Wikispecies See (({link))}
Wikiversity See (({link))}

Regards, David Kernow (talk) 20:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Updated Notification here in chronological timeline. // FrankB 16:53, 26 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 subst and delete as a vanity template. Tijuana Brass 10:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Tenacious D fan smashman2004[edit]

Template:WikiProject Tenacious D fan smashman2004 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Your reason(s) for nominating the template. --Tenacious D Fans (talk) 07:16, 15 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.

Template:ESPN Radio

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. —Cryptic 11:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ESPN Radio (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Inserted into the page for most every ESPN Radio affiliate. Basically, its purpose is to act as a copy-and-paste for information into a mass number of articles, leading in some cases to some very disjointed and unnecessarily long articles (see Triple X ESPN Radio). --fuzzy510 06:48, 15 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.

Template:Obscene-n

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 per earlier debate. >Radiant< 10:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Obscene-n (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Duplicate of ((Obscene)), recently deleted here. It's not really a repost of deleted content, since it was created in March. -Amarkov blahedits 06:29, 15 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.

Template:Delete summary

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. —Cryptic 11:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Delete summary (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Pretty much per reasoning at WP:DTTR. Telling people about this using a template just comes off condescending. -Amarkov blahedits 06:24, 15 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.

Template:Sermon

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. —Cryptic 11:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

This template isn't really useful. Other templates convey that an article is written in a nonencyclopedic tone, and calling the article a sermon is unnecessarily inflammatory. Also, browsing the transclusions, it's obvious that people aren't even restricting this to things which truly do sound like sermons. -Amarkov blahedits 05:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I was about to nominate this one for TfD when I noticed it had already been done. Adding to the above reasons for deletion, this template is redundant to other, better written (and more NPOV) templates such as ((POV)) and ((Disputed)). Delete. Tijuana Brass 10:37, 15 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.

Template:Campaignbox Turkish-Armenian War

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. Withdrawn by nominator. Khoikhoi 00:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Campaignbox Turkish-Armenian War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I don't think that these topics deserves their own infobox let alone their own articles (see deletion nomination on each for explanation). Most of the information covered here is already extensively covered in the Turkish-Armenian War article. -- Clevelander 03:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, on second thought, I was acting irrationally. Of course these articles can be expanded. I apologize for causing a big stir about all this. Nomination withdrawn. -- Clevelander 14:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
These are the battles of the Turkish-Armenian War, which each battle has its own page, some battles may be a stub, but we keep these battles and the campaign box links them to the main article. It is a POV on the Clevelander side if a battle deserves its own page or not.OttomanReference 03:53, 15 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.

Template:Stablenotice

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. —Cryptic 11:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Another template from that rejected proposal from August. --TRKtvtce 01:31, 15 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.