< March 24	March 26 >

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 no consensus. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:G14 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The G-14 group of football clubs was disbanded in February 2008 [1] [2] and as such, this navbox of the group's member clubs is now redundant. Qwghlm (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. The list of clubs in the G14 can be retained in the article now it has disbanded. пﮟოьεԻ 57 22:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The G-14 was a fairly important part of football for the past 7 years. Though G-14 is defunct, I believe it and its template still remain notable. crassic!^[talk] 20:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Would it be okay to rename the title of the template to "Former members of G-14"? Regards, Midorihana^{~いいですね? はい!} 01:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would think that would be better than deleting it all together. crassic!^[talk] 18:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and rename. BigDunc (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per my suggestion. Midorihana^{~いいですね? はい!} 05:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, it makes no sense now. There were lots of influential organisations in the past, should we make a template for each of them? MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 11:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per MaxSem. – PeeJay 16:07, 2 April 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 userfy. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Easter1916 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Per WP:NOT#MEMORIAL. I could be wrong on the application of policy though. Seems to be a template to be used as a memorial on userpages. — Traditional unionist (talk) 20:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep No more a memorial than this. BigDunc (talk) 20:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - thats an image, not a template.Traditional unionist (talk) 20:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Quite a number of articles it could be used on, for example all the Bio articles on 1916 Easter Rising. BigDunc also makes a very useful point. --Domer48 (talk) 20:39, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It's a quote from Patrick Pearse why should it go on all the bio articles of those who took part in the 1916 Rising. Do we need to clutter up their pages with Pearse quotes? Snappy56 (talk) 09:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep ---Padraig (talk) 21:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Userfy If it's designed for use in userspace only, it shouldn't be in template space. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Userfy or Subst it. Perfectly legit, but it shouldn't be in the template namespace. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Treat as part of the German Userboxen Solution and userfy, with a caution to the many editors who keep adding fair-use images to it to cease and desist. ➨ REDVEЯS is a satellite and will be set alight 08:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Not a proper template Snappy56 (talk) 09:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• move has no use in article space, so should be located in user space Fasach Nua (talk) 13:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Treat this as a big userbox Place it in the userspace of the user who created it, or the main author, replace all mentions of it with its new location and delete it from the template namespace. — Κaiba 15:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep Its a quote, but still I could do some work, its not really a template. Fallen Angel 16:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Userfy, per above. An appropriate sentiment for userspace. Gracenotes^T § 03:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Userfy – It doesn't belong in the main space but would be fine in the user space. Jɪmp 01:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Userfy It should be fine in userspace, but it shouldn't be in mainspace. Midorihana^{~いいですね? はい!} 21:29, 28 March 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 Woohookitty^Woohoo! 07:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mal char (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Template encourages links to MyAnimeList, a site that provides links to illegal fansubs of anime series making it a violation of WP:COPYVIO. It also fails all tests for being a WP:RS.

• Delete - Agree with nomination, it just promotes fan site linking. swaq 19:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above.Traditional unionist (talk) 20:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'm not sure about being a WP:RS, however the official policy of the site is that it bans links to fansubs, and deletes them when found. Figured this should be clarified.

In addition, site is not a fansite. Kei-clone (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply It's a social networking site, which is similar to a fansite. Either way it fails WP:EL. swaq 15:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Link spamming template. The external links, which frequently uses Wikipedia as its source, do not contain any additional information then what is not already available in the Wikipedia article and would fail WP:EL. --Farix (Talk) 22:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Fallen Angel 16:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Violates Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided (#10 on the list), and as a side note, is orphaned/not in use. Midorihana^{~いいですね? はい!} 21:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply I removed links to MyAnimeList per WP:EL, hence why it is orphaned. swaq 21:38, 28 March 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. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MAAC Football League (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This NCAA Division I-FCS league is no longer sponsoring football as of the end of this past year. Both teams left on the template will be independents in the upcoming year. Dafoeberezin3494 (talk) 15:30, 25 March 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, not used since the only article it was in was deleted and unlikely to be used anyway. Nabla (talk) 21:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Useless infobox, created solely to celebrate a distributed-computing "team"'s achievements (see here) and place more of them onto Wikipedia. Almost zero-chance of any such articles surviving AFD or speedy deletion to begin with, so no point to this infobox. See also Template:Infobox Distributed teams/doc. — Calton | Talk 16:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• At this moment it is only for one team, but for future purposes, it is there to promote the creation of wiki's for more distributed computing teams. Hawkeye2400 (talk) 16:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps you missed Almost-zero chance of any such articles surviving AFD or speedy deletion to begin with, so no point to this infobox, above. --Calton | Talk 16:38, 25 March 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.