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 deletion. RyanGerbil10(Four more years!) 01:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Non-free Microsoft software screenshot (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Permission-Microsoft (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) (as a redirect to above, but is unused)

The text of the template states that we are using screenshots of Microsoft software "with permission from Microsoft Corporation". This is not true; we use screenshots of Microsoft software on Wikipedia in the same way that we use screenshots of all other non-free Microsoft software: Wikipedia:Non-free content's fair-use policy. We also don't generally make exceptions for images from a particular corporation unless it's absolutely necessary. We already have a template, ((Non-free software screenshot)) which adequately covers any image that would have this template applied to it. Warren -talk- 19:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, not nessesary and current wording might mislead people into thinking that screenshots of Microsoft software may be used more liberaly on Wikipedia than other screenshots, wich is not the case. --Sherool (talk) 18:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Microsoft software screenshots are different to other non-free non-Microsoft software; Microsoft allows the use of screenshots. See Use of Microsoft Copyrighted content#Screen shots. --Joshua Issac (talk) 16:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it's nice of them to grant some permissions, but it's still a fairly limited set (you could pretty much legaly use them for everyting they granted permission even without their permission anyway). It doesn't come close to qualify as free content, and all non-free content must comply with all of the Wikipedia non-free content criteria, even if they had granted special permission for unrestricted use on Wikipedia itself. So at least in it's current form it's just not rellevant for the use of these images on Wikipedia. Yeah a simple re-write could solve thoes issues, but then it would pretty much just be a clone of ((Non-free software screenshot)) anway. --Sherool (talk) 01:02, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - although their permissions give a little extra freedom over fair use (such as usage in ads), we don't benefit from them much if at all. On the other hand, the additional requirements imposed give us much more trouble (prohibition of comparative reviewing, attribution, no third-party content). Finally, it's another bunch of conditions that must be understood and followed by everyone involved. No thanks. Let's just use the common fair-use principles. Less pain, more gain. 81.5.100.223 (talk) 01:47, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RyanGerbil10(Four more years!) 20:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete We don't need this nonsense from Microsoft. Fair use is more than sufficient for our purposes. This isn't. (Admins, if you're going to say this should be decided by the community at the village pump or some such place, now would be a good time to speedy close this...) --Thinboy00 @204, i.e. 03:53, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fair use works fine for these purposes. لennavecia 01:18, 2 December 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 procedural speedy keep -- nominator has been banned and no one else appears to support deletion. No prejudice against relisting. Non-admin closure --Thinboy00 @207, i.e. 03:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Microsoft Expression Studio (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Delete. This template info is reduant in Template:Microsoft development tools, section: Expression Studios, there is no need for a template that Microsoft doesn't have special developement or any significant plans. It look a bit like advertising a suite of products than providing useful information. --Ramu50 (talk) 19:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do articles that include "Microsoft Expression Studio" already include and "Microsoft development tools"? -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RyanGerbil10(Four more years!) 19:59, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Two reasons: one, a large chunk of the Expression suite is a set of design tools, not a set of development tools. Two, to be rather blunt about it, a great many of User:Ramu50's edits in computing articles are being questioned by other editors, and the editor is on the verge of being blocked for disruptive behaviour related to computing templates. Warren -talk- 22:41, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The nominator of this TFD has been indefbanned due to poor behaviour related to templates. [1] Warren -talk- 03:00, 30 November 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 --Magioladitis (talk) 00:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stargate-expand (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A weird mix between a stub template and ((expand)). Unused, can be replaced by normal cleanup templates. – sgeureka ^t•c 19:17, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Mutant stub template, not used. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 15:56, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Created over two years ago, but is unused. لennavecia 01:19, 2 December 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. JPG-GR (talk) 04:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mobile Fighter G Gundam characters (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All characters have been merged into main list. Template is no longer in use as a result. Farix (Talk) 17:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete; looks like the right thing was done here as far as handling fictional characters in a television series are concerned. Warren -talk- 12:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Created over two years ago, but is unused. لennavecia 01:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I would say merge, but there's nothing to merge and nowhere to merge to. I should really get started on that whole Gundam navbox cleanup project... —Dinoguy1000 22:45, 4 December 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. JPG-GR (talk) 04:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:This is a Wikipedia User Page (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Seems to be an inappropriate use for a template IMO - single use, adding a line to a userpage which could just as easily be done by actually editing the userpage. Grutness...wha? 05:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• How about Replace with:

76.66.195.63 (talk) 06:22, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong delete. This template was created by, and is in use by, a single editor. Templates aren't intended for use on a single page. And we already have a standard template for user pages: ((userpage)). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:18, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per above, redundant to ((userpage)). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 05:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to ((Userpage)) as that template already performs the function that this one is supposed to. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 15:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Subst and delete per John Broughton. This is not identical to or largely duplicative of ((userpage)). --Thinboy00 @216, i.e. 04:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete - It's not even a template. It's a personal note page in the template space. لennavecia 01:13, 2 December 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.