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. Woohookitty^Woohoo! 04:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Marine Reptiles userbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This template's not a userbox, for one, and is only used on one page in the User namespace. User has been notified. — — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 21:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Migrate The wording and the formatting may not look like a userbox. But it's placed in between other useboxes at User:Crocodileman. Wikipedia:WikiProject Userbox Migration may have the answer. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's intended use was for articles, not userspace, and is superseded by Template:AARTalk.  hmwith  talk 15:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as redundant; not a userbox. The actual(?) userbox (Template:WikiProject Marine Reptiles userbox) has been speedied. –Pomte 05:54, 21 June 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 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sr13 07:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Big Brother Housemates Info (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

An undiscussed fork created to circumvent consensus that was formed to prevent overcrowding of and the inclusion of an excessive number of colours in the original template, Template:Big Brother housemates. J Di 19:52, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete User:3bay sam, the creator of the template in question, has relatively little experience. Template:Big Brother Housemates Info is a fork of Template:Big Brother housemates while something is still being discussed. We should not encouraged this kind of behavior. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As said, this WP:POVFORK should be quickly deleted.  hmwith  talk 15:16, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Please heed consensus on one template. –Pomte 05:55, 21 June 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 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sr13 07:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Guster-Project (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Unused template for a failed WikiProject proposal. Shinhan 18:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as creator. No reason for it to remain. I had forgotten that it was even there. Hmwith 21:21, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion G6 or G7. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete NRV. Dfrg.msc 06:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete- per all of the above. Eddie 20:49, 14 June 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 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty^Woohoo! 04:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused template from deleted WikiProject, almost put as Speedy Delete but just wasnt sure. Shinhan 18:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete – The project is now a task force of WikiProject Nintendo. — Madman bum and angel (talk – desk) 18:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• From Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/archive22#Nintendo Wars:

I believe that we can call Wikipedia:WikiProject Nintendo Wars officially dead. I've orphaned the ((NWSeriesProject)) project header as a result. Should this be outright deleted, merged with Nintendo, or merged wtih the parent CVG project? Hbdragon88 07:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Wikiproject Strategy Games. That should cover the NW series and Nectaris anyway. --Juigi Kario (Charge! * My crusades) 11:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Either that or Wikipedia:WikiProject Nintendo. In my opinion all these separate wikiprojects should be task forces of this wikiproject, like Capcom taskforce, but whatever... people seem to like the extra bureaucracy on Wikipedia. JACOPLANE • 2007-02-4 22:33

Although I do not believe in all of WIkiProject CVG's child projects becoming it's task forces (WP:MMO has over 500 articles under its scope as an example), I think that WP:NW should be a task force of WikiProject Nintendo. Besides, it only has about 10 articles under it's scope (WikiProject RuneScape became a task force of WP:MMO due to its limited scope). According to the WikiProject Council's guide "Obviously, we could create separate projects for every article should we wish to; but, just as obviously, we don't, as it would be much easier to simply collaborate on the talk page. In general, if there are fewer than a few dozen articles within the projected scope of the project, it would probably be more efficient to simply work within a larger project which includes them." In short, I might be bold and just do it if there no objections soon. Greeves ^{(talk • contribs • reviews)} 01:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. If someone wants to revive it into a task force (I don't see an existing one), then the option can be added to ((NESproj)). –Pomte 05:59, 21 June 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 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sr13 07:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Used only in one instance, at the talk page of the MTSU project. The project in question already has a much better designed, coded, and actually utilized article talk page template at ((WikiProject MTSU)). — Shinhan 17:33, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - take a look. Not pretty :( Creative and fun to use, but standards often exist for a good reason. Gracenotes^T § 18:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (Replace with Template:WikiProject MTSU) Template:WikiProject MTSU supersedes the template in question. And the former has the look and feel that is similar to other project banner. The use of style="position:absolute; z-index:100; right:5px; top:25px;" in Template:Mtsu should not be encouraged, as Gracenotes pointed out. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete superseded by Template:WikiProject MTSU.  hmwith  talk 15:20, 16 June 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 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty^Woohoo! 04:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:Air Ep Nav (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

These templates are not in use anymore. They was once used for Air character and episode articles that don't exist anymore, thus these template are useless. — 十八 07:03, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both They are indeed not used. And as far as I can tell, there are no articles for individual characters or episodes for the series. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 13:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment ((Air Ep Nav)) uses ((Anime Ep Nav)), which is of succession-box style. That may be replaced by ((Infobox Television episode)). --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 13:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete obsolete. –Pomte 05:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No Redeeming Value. Dfrg.msc 06:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Must have been missed when the articles were deleted. As mentioned, it's obsolete.  hmwith  talk 15:22, 16 June 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 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. If the old template was still being used, I'd go for a redirect but it isn't. Woohookitty^Woohoo! 04:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:SEC basketball coaches (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Replaced by the easier-to-read ((SECBasketballCoach)). — fuzzy510 04:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete housekeeping. Next time, please directly replace the content of the template, instead of creating a new one, and then raise TFD on the old one. Thank you. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 13:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • My apologies - I was trying to also reform the name of the template as well as the template itself. --fuzzy510 18:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the latter is much easier to read.  hmwith  talk 15:23, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Template:SEC basketball coaches since the new template has already been transcluded, though it looked worse stylistically with its huge font and height. I've shrunk it down to be more consistent with the other coach templates. –Pomte 06:14, 21 June 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 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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty^Woohoo! 04:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Hive (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am nominating this template for deletion because it is redundant, will probably never be used, is not useful, and because it is not even set up like a template. — James, La gloria è a dio 03:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Not the purpose of templates. --fuzzy510 04:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no brainer. housekeeping. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 13:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Improve I made it, I just didn't know how to create a "real link" For thsoe interested in anarchist pedagogy, this is an important experience — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThePuebloUni (talk • contribs) 21:09, 13 June 2007

• Comment This question is to the creator, ThePuebloUni. Do you know what the Template: namespace is for? Do you intend the content ""La Ruche" was created in 1904 by the anarchist pedagogue Sébastien Faure...." to be included on multiple pages? (To other editors: relevant edit is [1]) --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It is my belief that ThePuebloUni intended to created something like The Hive (school). If this is true, then the content should be cut and pasted there. It does not make sense to redirect this template to there. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've merged the material into Sébastien Faure. Unless La Ruche had some major significance apart from Faure, I think it can stay as a section in his article. –Pomte 05:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - not a template. --Haemo 00:59, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merged. The template should be changed to #REDIRECT [[Sébastien Faure]] ((R from merged)). –Pomte 03:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or migrate to mainspace As mentioned, it's not a template.  hmwith  talk 15:24, 16 June 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 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 page.

The result of the debate was remove and delete —METS501 (talk) 16:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Legends of Horror Cinema (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This is just way too subjective and I do not see how this could be turned into an encyclopedic template. — Prolog 03:12, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. If there was some sort of established and credible list of horror legends, that's one thing, but this is completely subjective. --fuzzy510 04:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Remove from article then delete Too subjective. This is not like Academy award winners. The creator of the template has been properly notified. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 13:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• No Comment As the creator of the template, I won't say that it should be deleted, but neither will I say that the other users are wrong in their reasons for wanting it deleted. Do what the majority wants. I have no problem with it being deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam B. Sheets (talk • contribs) 02:36, 14 June 2007
• Delete I agree that it is too subjective for an encyclopedia. It should be said that the actors noted would go great on a blog about Horror Cinema. I also feel that Adam is to be commended both for the work that he put into creating the template and, especially, for the graciousness of his above statement regarding this vote. MarnetteD | Talk 02:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Find a way to fix it. -- Jelly Soup 21:02, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Wikipedia is not... a bestower of awards. If that isn't a policy, it should be. - Richfife 21:40, 17 June 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 section.