< July 23	July 25 >

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 debate was delete

Template:Kings of Media (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

5-item template, all included in ((Median topics)) template. — Twofistedcoffeedrinker (talk) 23:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I think Median topics does this template's job nicely.--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Redundant to ((Median topics)). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 20:36, 30 July 2008 (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 debate was delete. PeterSymonds (talk) 10:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coord named (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Nominating template "Coord named" which is:

• not referenced by any real Wiki articles Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Coord_named, and
• is just a redirect to template "Hcard-geo". LeheckaG (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Seems to be part of some past campaign which has wilted since its main invested contributor copped a one-year ban for behaviour in and around this area. Orderinchaos 11:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The template is a redirect because it was recently moved to a new title (only a few hours before this TfD). Redirects are cheap. -- Ned Scott 06:09, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ha, except I missed the part where the move happened last year. I still support keeping this, however, since redirects are cheap. -- Ned Scott 06:13, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I missed the part where the target was deprecated. Deletion is fine by me. -- Ned Scott 08:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I am not sure whether I am "allowed" to vote since I nominated it? WP:GEO would like to reduce the complexity and number of "Coordinate" templates, and the ((Coord named)) redirect is not used by any Wiki article (see the WhatLinksHere above, at least when I nominated it). As no Wiki articles or templates use it, it only serves to "mislead" people searching for a "Coor" or "Coord" template family to the ((Hcard-geo)) template instead, which is a member of the "Hcard" family of templates and not the "Coor" or "Coord" family of templates. While the redirect is "cheap" in terms of system resources, it is "expensive" in terms of time, "misleading" people looking for a Coor/Coord template to Hcard, and then any future/potential "clean-up" WP:GEO has to do to update "non-standard" coordinate templates to the "appropriate" ones. LeheckaG (talk) 09:38, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• comment. You are perfectly entitled to provide further reasoning for your deletion nomination. Maybe it would just be better to avoid tagging the intervention as delete to avoid confusion. Maybe comment, comment by nominator, reply, ... If it is s direct reply to someone, then indenting - just as I did - is a good option too. - Nabla (talk) 11:49, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Unused redirect to an apparently deprecated templates == unnecessary complexity. Mr.Z-man 20:48, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Then shouldn't we point this redirect to the current template? -- Ned Scott 08:29, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• No, "Coord named" redirect should get deleted and NOT (re-)redirected to another template. In the search box, when you type "Template:Coord", in the pop-up list which comes up "Template:Coord" is already #1, and "Template:Coord named" is #2. Are you proposing to redirect "Coord named" to "Coord"? I hope not. "Coord named" should not be on the list at all so that actual Coord templates appear. The point of deleting "Coord named" is getting rid of one of many "red herrings", so that article contributors looking for a Coordinate template have a shorter template list to choose from (instead of also being "cluttered" with unused redirects). "Coord named" is one of the "easy" ones to get rid of since it is "typing up the #2 spot" and it is not actually used for anything in article or template namespace, the only references are in Talk and User namespace where it is mentioned in combination with Hcard-geo, so there is no "history" to preserve. Any history was deleted when Hcard-geo was renamed to Coord named and renamed back to Hcard-geo. LeheckaG (talk) 09:40, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - unused redirect to obsolete template. -- SEWilco (talk) 03:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per SEWilco. This can hardly be useful in any way. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Background[edit]

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Inline Templates and User:Pie4all88/Templates mention: "Hcard-geo a.k.a. Coord named" as "out-of-scope" for WP:ILT

• Template talk:Hcard-geo says:

• "((Hcard-geo)) was already merged into ((Coord named)); no reason no to merge ((Hcard-geo-title)), which appears to be only different by two caracters. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 10:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC) There's a proposal at Template talk:Coord#Moving_microformat_markup_from_articles_to_coord to merge the functionality of this template into ((coord)), so that both ((Coord named)) and ((Hcard-geo-title)) will become redundant. The only opposition comes from the creator of this template. --Para 11:17, 24 July 2007 (UTC) "

• "Coord named" History says:

• (cur) (last) 2007-07-24T11:52:55 Pigsonthewing (Talk | contribs) (32 bytes) (moved Template:Coord named to Template:Hcard-geo over redirect: consistency)

• Template talk:Hcard-bday says:

• "As a temporary solution to a similar geekyness problem I renamed ((Hcard-geo)) to ((Coord named)), but was reverted without explanation. That would only have solved the naming issue of the template though; the template usage itself would still have been repetitive (((coord named|...|coord)) instead of just ((coord|...))). --Para 22:53, 24 July 2007 (UTC)"

• Template talk:Coord/Archive 4 says:

• "I have just moved Template:Hcard-geo to Template:Coord named. The syntax is however still unnecessarily complex to be used more widely, when everything could be done in coord with a single added parameter. --Para 17:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)"
• "I tried once to rename ((Hcard-geo)) to ((Coord named)), but the creator's ownership issues made him keep the naming of all templates that exist only to generate a microformat as Template:Hcard-something. It wouldn't have been an ideal solution anyway though, with its unnecessary template wrapping. When editors surround a piece of information with something to tag it, the use of those tags (or templates in most Wikipedia cases) should be readable to all editors. Any consequential additional functionality should be implemented inside those data annotation templates so that it's transparent to editors. Templates should not be named after the element they represent on the presentation level, but following the content they're tagging. I don't see anything ridiculous in this basic design rule. With coordinate annotation I mean giving a name to coordinates and having the possibility to display or otherwise use it somewhere. Because generating prose with templates is not practical, the possibilities do not extend to displaying the name in articles. It's just too complicated and by no means with just 1% of articles with inline coordinates. Unless you intend to modify the manual of style to say that coordinates must be given right after the name of their location, a name can not be displayed. --Para 18:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)"

• Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Geographical_coordinates#TFD_Coord_named says:

• "I nominated ((Coord named)) for deletion Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_July_24#Template:Coord_named. It is only a redirect to ((Hcard-geo)) as a result of Hcard-geo being renamed to "Coord named" and then being renamed back again, and it is not used by other Wiki articles or templates Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Coord_named, for details see discussion under the TFD log I cited. Please Vote as appropriate, either: Delete or Keep. LeheckaG (talk) 10:19, 26 July 2008 (UTC)"

Summary:

• "Coord named" and "Hcard-geo" functionality were merged
• Para moved Hcard-geo to "Coord named" deleting prior "Coord named" history
• Pigsonthewing moved it back (creating the redirect)
• Hcard-geo functionality was incorporated into Coord
• "Coor" and "Coord" have better functionality and syntax than "Hcard-geo"
• "Coord named" redirect "misleads" some to "Hcard-geo" template instead.

LeheckaG (talk) 10:15, 26 July 2008 (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 debate was delete. Garion96 (talk) 21:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:U-17 Mexico Squad 2005 World Cup (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

It's a list of players who won the 2005 U-17 football (soccer) world cup, that world cup isn't really notable. It's also the only country to have a template, the other countries that were in the 2005 U-17 World Cup don't have a template. — BlueRed 20:27, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Template is not necessary. Monarcas28 (talk) 21:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not notable enough squad to merit separate template. --Friejose (talk) 16:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. We should not start having templates for youth teams. There are too many youth teams out there. --Tocino 22:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Mexico won the cup, which makes me swing away from Delete, but the cup is just too obscure and the fact that only 16 countries participated isn't good for the my judgement of the template. BTW, there are lots of red links, stubs and stub-like articles. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Certainly many more teams participated. Most likely 100+, but only 16 reach the final stage. Anyway navigational templates for teams specially w/ 16/17 y.o. players? No thanks. Delete - Nabla (talk) 17:51, 2 August 2008 (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 debate was delete. Garion96 (talk) 21:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Seth Rogen (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The template includes Seth Rogen's various involvements in the film industry, ranging from minor to major. The precedent has been to delete actor templates due to the varying sizes of their roles, and it has not been commonplace to have writer templates, at least for people like him who are not quite famous in that capacity. Rogen has no directing credits, either, otherwise the template could have been adjusted toward that as is commonplace. Thus I place it here for deletion. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per nom and precedent. Actors shouldn't have their own templates. Lugnuts (talk) 18:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per nomination and precedent. Single person templates are not per consensus. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Precedent and the reasonable above ideas support deletion. ThuranX (talk) 05:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Erik's reasons for nom. 209.247.22.164 (talk) 17:13, 26 July 2008 (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 debate was delete. Garion96 (talk) 21:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Notability-inline (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Notability (per wp:notability) only affects entire topics and articles, therefore inline-notability is basically meaningless. The likely intent of this template was to challenge the prominence of particular authors or views (as in wp:undue or other neutrality topics); However, the 'inline-notability' name makes that confusing. not many links to this page, and most of those from talk pages. Ludwigs2 03:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Confusing template, no real use. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 17:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The notability guideline is for whole articles. --- RockMFR 04:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment something like this could be used to flag things that might be considered overly trivial... Is there such a template? 70.51.8.231 (talk) 05:09, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: concur with RockMFR. However, if I had come across this template prior to its TfD, I might well have used it as a reasonable approximation for either (i) tagging trivial statements or (ii) tagging WP:UNDUE weight to viewpoints from obscure/inexpert sources. Some such replacement inline-tag(s) might be useful. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 06:19, 30 July 2008 (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 debate was delete Garion96 (talk) 21:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Neighborhoods of Norwich, CT‎  (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

It is an old copy of Neighborhoods of Norwich, Connecticut, it is unused and it is not a template. — -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 06:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Serves no apparent purpose. --Friejose (talk) 15:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Article in template-space, not used anyway. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 17:01, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. per TenPoundHammer. The notability of the neighborhoods is also left unasserted and the article is unreferenced. We could try to move it to mainspace, but a neighborhood in my city is considered something as populous as Norwich itself and this seems to be mostly a list of city blocks and intersections. An article about this in mainspace already exists. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:37, 29 July 2008 (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.