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 discussion was speedy delete per WP:CSD#G6. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:China Superbike Championship Circuit (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not worthy of a template for such a minor racing series and with so few links on the template which is only about th ree circuits. Officially Mr X (talk) 18:15, 29 January 2010 (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 discussion was speedy delete per WP:CSD#G6. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Formula V6 Asia Series circuits (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The template is minimal (with links elsewhere) and little significance seeing as the series is defunct and was quite minor in the first place. Officially Mr X (talk) 18:15, 29 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:European Football League (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Entirely redlinks, minus title. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

delete. As nom only one blue link on template, which kind of defeats the point. Used on two articles one of which is the one blue link on the template. On a separate note, I would be unsure whether American Football in Europe is prominent enough to justify all of these articles. Pit-yacker (talk) 13:50, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Deletesection (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No used, not useful. Damiens.rf 15:36, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unnecessary, as deletion of sections is not part of deletion policy, and shouldn't be (as the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle can be used). snigbrook (talk) 21:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per above reasons from Damiens.rf and Snigbrook. Anyone hesitant to delete sections without approval can bring it up on the article's talk page, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 17:56, 4 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete. NW (Talk) 23:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MySpace-Wikipedian (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unnecessary, unused, orphaned fork of Template:MySpace –xeno^talk 14:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral, for now - Unused. It could be used, but I'm not sure if this is appropriate for Wikipedia, it has a...well...WP:MYSPACE-y feel to it. Then again, it might direct unnecessary talk page chit-chat away from Wikipedia (wait. I may have this all wrong. Is this for displaying the MySpace page of a Wikipedian, presumably on that user's userpage? I'll assume yes, until notified otherwise), Lord Spizzilizounge, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 21:07, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - unnecessary. If people want to link their MySpace from their userpage, okay, I've seen it done before. But we don't need to provide a special template for it. JamieS93 13:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete- redundant and unused. Pit-yacker (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - People can link to their MySpace page if they want, maybe it helps. But templates to format it are completely unnecessary. We have these for articles so that (presumably?) there's a degree of uniformity in external links of the same type, eg. IMDb, MySpace. But userpages aren't articles. And it's orphaned, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 16:44, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect to the original template. The fork appears to have been created to keep user pages out of an article category (Category:Celebrities with Myspace accounts). Even if the category is recreated and added to Template:MySpace, a separate template wouldn't be needed as the main template could be changed to only add the category when used in articles. snigbrook (talk) 22:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, the reason it was created was that the MySpace template was being used outside of the article namespace, and thus the Whatlinkshere was giving tons of garbage. This was an attempt to minimize the amount of userpages etc using the template. (I created this template four years ago.) -- Zanimum (talk) 17:33, 1 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IPA fonts (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:32, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Deprecated for almost four years; only remaining uses are a couple of old talk pages and preferences for an inactive user. --RL0919 (talk) 03:30, 6 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete. NW (Talk) 23:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ibus (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Deprecated and replaced by ((infobox road small)). —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 15:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — So long, ibus, how we barely knew you. Imzadi1979 (talk) 15:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Per above. ---Dough4872 19:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and possibly speedy under the deprecated template criterion. --Rschen7754 23:52, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Replace and redirect Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dynamic navigation box (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, only used in a handful of articles and portals. Redundant of ((Navbox)) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect —Ms2ger (talk) 16:26, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Will redirecting allow the existing transclusions to be rendered properly? In other words, is this template completely interchangeable with ((navbox))? Thanks, –Black Falcon ^(talk) 07:21, 8 February 2010 (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 discussion was Replace and redirect Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dynamic navigation box with image (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused. Redundant of ((Navbox)) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect —Ms2ger (talk) 16:26, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Will redirecting allow the existing transclusions to be rendered properly? In other words, is this template completely interchangeable with ((navbox))? Thanks, –Black Falcon ^(talk) 07:21, 8 February 2010 (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 discussion was Replace and redirect Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NavigationBox (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, only used in one article. Redundant of ((Navbox)) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:33, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Replace with 'navbox' and then redirect to it. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 05:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect —Ms2ger (talk) 16:26, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Will redirecting allow the existing transclusions to be rendered properly? In other words, is this template completely interchangeable with ((navbox))? Thanks, –Black Falcon ^(talk) 07:21, 8 February 2010 (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 discussion was Replace and redirect, although it is almost entirely compatible Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Navigation with columns (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecate, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect —Ms2ger (talk) 16:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Will redirecting allow the existing transclusions to be rendered properly? In other words, is this template completely interchangeable with ((navbox))? Thanks, –Black Falcon ^(talk) 07:21, 8 February 2010 (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 discussion was delete Magioladitis (talk) 15:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Geolinks-US-hoodscale (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Deprecated and obsoleted by ((coord)). Unused in article space. Pit-yacker (talk) 01:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Doublecheck for any uses and delete. --Chinasaur (talk) 18:27, 1 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete. RL0919 (talk) 03:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Geolinks-US-cityscale (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:21, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Deprecated and obsoleted by ((coord)). Unused in article space. Pit-yacker (talk) 01:10, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Used in one article now looks like, but replace and delete. --Chinasaur (talk) 18:26, 1 February 2010 (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 discussion was delete Magioladitis (talk) 15:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Geolinks-cityscale (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:20, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Deprecated and obsoleted by ((coord)). Unused in article space. Pit-yacker (talk) 01:10, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Check for any uses and delete. --Chinasaur (talk) 18:26, 1 February 2010 (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 discussion was delete Magioladitis (talk) 15:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Unicode fonts (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Deprecated for almost four years; no significant uses remaining. --RL0919 (talk) 03:25, 6 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stub-classicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in few transclusions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:18, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was replace transclusions with Template:Tfdend and delete. –Black Falcon ^(talk) 07:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tfd-kept (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in few transclusions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:18, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Fix the transclusions, then redirect to the current template. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 11:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Different parameters are used, so links in old versions of talk pages would not work correctly (unless the parameters are also added to the current template). snigbrook (talk) 22:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  If we delete the template, it still wouldn't work, so why does that matter? 70.29.210.242 (talk) 05:29, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  There doesn't appear to be any other reason to redirect instead of keeping or deleting the template. snigbrook (talk) 13:03, 1 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Start-classicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, easily replaced in few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Redirect to ((hidden)), as it appears to be parameter compatible Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Show hide box (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, only used in one article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Now unused; I converted the article to use ((Hidden begin)) and ((Hidden end)) which are good replacements for ((Show hide box)): just as easy to use, and more versatile. — John Cardinal (talk) 04:21, 3 February 2010 (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 discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:21, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Prussia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:13, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Unused and replaced by a different banner. --RL0919 (talk) 03:17, 6 February 2010 (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 discussion was Mark as historical Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RFChist (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RFClang (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RFCmedia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RFCpol (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RFCpolicy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RFCreli (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RFCstyle (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:45, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - historical, has incoming links. –xeno^talk 14:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment If kept, please mark as historical. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:36, 8 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete. RL0919 (talk) 03:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Getamap (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:44, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Use of templates linking to specific sites should be discouraged in favour of one of the many templates that provide a choice of map sources. Pit-yacker (talk) 21:25, 29 January 2010 (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 discussion was Mark as historical Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RFCsoc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RFCsci (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RFCecon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RFCbio (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - historical, has incoming links. –xeno^talk 14:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Per Xeno, but it should probably be marked as historical, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 18:06, 4 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PR-icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:57, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NA-classicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:38, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 23:04, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:57, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:List-classicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:32, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 23:04, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete. NW (Talk) 23:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MDUSbus (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused (two transclusions as of this writing.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:32, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Template has been deprecated, ((infobox road small)) now handles the function. ---Dough4872 18:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per above. Imzadi1979 (talk) 19:43, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and replaced by ((infobox road small)). —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 20:18, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and possibly speedy under the deprecated template criterion. --Rschen7754 23:52, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:52, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GAH-icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 23:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GA2ndopinion-icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, and it's much easier to type the given transclusion (sp?) too. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 06:33, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No need for the duplicate template, and original name is cumbersome Adam McCormick (talk) 23:02, 29 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GA-classicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 23:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FGAN-icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:26, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 23:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as redundant as long as replacement occurs along with deletion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:26, 6 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:03, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:DA-icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 22:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GAN-icon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:24, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 22:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as redundant as long as replacement occurs along with deletion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:26, 6 February 2010 (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 discussion was Keep for use in case of bot failure. Changes to documentation to clarify this purpose are left to editorial discretion. RL0919 (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FACfailed (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:22, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Absolutely not, and inquiring at the FA pages would have been helpful. This template is currently not in use only because GimmeBot does the work; should anything happen to GimmeBot, we still need this template, and that's why we've kept it (and other similar templates) around. IF the bot were to go down for some unforeseen reason, I would need this template, and having to recreate it during a bot crisis would not be fun. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:17, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I suspect this nom came about because I marked the template as deprecated last year. As Sandy says, we don't currently use this template because we are fortunate to have a bot that employs ((ArticleHistory)) on failed FACs, but we need to keep it around in case manual FAC closes become necessary. Maralia (talk) 19:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep — Sandy has a difficult and thankless job as is, so anything that would make it easier for her in a potentially trying time would be necessary. Imzadi1979 (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Since the consensus is building toward a no delete, may I suggest that someone add some <noinclude> text that reads something like, "Do not directly insert this template onto a talk page; it will be added by a bot." —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, this template isn't inserted by a bot, rather, it is what would be manually inserted if the bot was unavailable. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:07, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes Okay. Then something like, "Please do not insert this text manually unless Xbot is down." —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Please see Template:AR_links for an example of text that should probably be inserted into the documentation. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:59, 3 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FA-classicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, can be easily replaced in its few transculsions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:22, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:C-classicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, easily replaced in few instances. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 22:57, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:40, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:B-classicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, easily replaced in few instances. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:A-classicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, easily replaced in few instances. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect No need for the duplicate template AFAIK but no need to change all the references. Adam McCormick (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Deprecated and redundant, with few enough uses that they can all be replaced as part of the closing process. Unfortunately, a simple redirect won't work because the replacement template requires a parameter to produce the correct image. --RL0919 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2010 (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 discussion was redirect to Template:Ann to preserve the page history after removing replacing the single transclusion in Template talk:Ann company, where it is part of a section on how to use the now-deprecated template. –Black Falcon ^(talk) 20:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ann company (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:09, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to the succeeding Template:Ann per GFDL requirements as the newer template is derived from the older ((ann XXX)) templates. —Farix (t | c) 13:05, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Does GFDL apply to templates? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 14:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Templates do fall under the GFDL, and since ((ann)) uses code from the ((ann XXX)) templates, it is required to maintain the history of authorship. —Farix (t | c) 21:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, unused, deprecated, and really never needed in the first place. While ANN is great for info on anime/manga series, most of its company pages are lacking, at best, and add no value to articles. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 14:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to ((Ann)) per aforementioned GFDL requirements. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:38, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Leave alone - as mentioned above, this template must be kept because of GFDL concerns, but it already directly transcludes ((ann)) (it cannot be redirected because ((ann)) requires an extra parameter). There's simply nothing to do here. --Dinoguy1000 (talk · contribs) as 67.58.229.153 (talk) 00:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  ((ann company)) vs. ((ann|company)). Not much of a difference nor does using the template save on any keystrokes. —Farix (t | c) 14:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  This is true, but has no direct bearing on what I said. I was stating why the template should be kept and left alone, not making a recommendation on which should be used (I would advocate ((ann|company)) as well, though). --Dinoguy1000 (talk · contribs) as 67.58.229.153 (talk) 02:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment If there are licensing issues, why not do a history merge? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Hardly an objective (or particularly convincing) reason, but I personally hate the idea of history merging templates - it makes following the current template's development much more difficult and is nearly impossible to completely, correctly reverse at a later time should it be necessary for some reason. --Dinoguy1000 (talk · contribs) as 67.58.229.153 (talk) 04:49, 3 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:15, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox music venue (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:58, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Unused and deprecated for over 2 1/2 years. --RL0919 (talk) 00:24, 5 February 2010 (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 discussion was Delete as obsolete. RL0919 (talk) 14:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox minor planet (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, unused —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:26, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a decent idea to me. I don't think many people follow that talk page any more. -- Kheider (talk) 04:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Not used, obsoleted, replaced with a fully functional template. Seems like one of the most uncontroversial deletions possible. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 10:33, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unused template. Ruslik_Zero 18:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Retire with honours After a long service. Don't forget the redirects that point to it: Template:Minor Planet (which is transcluded by User:Scott3/planet ceres and Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomical objects/Infoboxes small solar system bodies), Template:Infobox dwarf planet, and Template:Infobox Minor Planet. Urhixidur (talk) 15:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment As I recall, there is a bot that deletes redlink redirects. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:05, 2 February 2010 (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.