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) 01:51, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Henderson State bowl games (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Useless navbox. All red links. Mhiji 23:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Even for schools with more bowl history, it seems like categorization is far more useful than a template. Resolute 14:49, 11 January 2011 (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 under WP:G8. Airplaneman ✈ 04:00, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Header Lists of places by name (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. List of places by name and the associated pages were previously deleted. Mhiji 23:41, 9 January 2011 (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) 23:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. Doesn't reflect consensus - shouldn't exist. Mhiji 23:40, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete part of a (failed) 2007 proposal. Also, doesn't reflect consensus. --- cymru.lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 03:30, 10 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 02:04, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 23:35, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 02:04, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hb team Ciudad Real (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to ((Hb team)) Mhiji 23:35, 9 January 2011 (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) 23:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hazfi Cup Seasons (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Redundant to Template:Hazfi Cup Mhiji 23:34, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It's redundant to Template:Hazfi Cup. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 07:40, 10 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 02:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hampton bowl games (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navbox. All red links. Mhiji 23:30, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 02:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Half flag color box (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Pretty useless. Mhiji 23:29, 9 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 23:28, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 02:02, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:HSBC States (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. All the links link to the template itself. Mhiji 23:28, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 02:01, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. WP:HCOTW is now inactive. Mhiji 23:26, 9 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 22:10, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Japanese television station (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Non-english Mhiji 22:49, 9 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 22:10, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Japanese minor go titleholders start (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 22:48, 9 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 22:10, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Japanese go titleholders (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 22:47, 9 January 2011 (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) 22:53, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Japanese go title holder list (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to Template:Japanese go titles Mhiji 22:46, 9 January 2011 (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) 22:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:JF Grang Software (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 22:42, 9 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 16:32, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:JB gp q (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 22:41, 9 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 16:32, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:REP2 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:REP1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 22:37, 9 January 2011 (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) 22:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RD header new (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Failed proposal. No longer necessary. Mhiji 22:37, 9 January 2011 (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) 22:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Radio Wikipedia Delivery (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Unnecessary, WP:Radio Wikipedia is now inactive. Mhiji 22:36, 9 January 2011 (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) 22:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. Redundant to ((SharedIPEDU)) Mhiji 22:33, 9 January 2011 (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) 22:57, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:La familia P. Luche (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Another template which links only the main article, a couple of more articles, and other cast/crew sections which do not belong to navboxes. WP:NENAN. --LoЯd ۞pεth 22:32, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Also, it's hideous. Mhiji 22:33, 9 January 2011 (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, if someone wants to create a "race flag" system, go right ahead, but this one is unused. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Red flag (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Just links to a picture. Mhiji 22:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment is there a race flag icon system similar to the country flag system? if not, merge this into such a system, so that race flags can be consistently displayed (green flag, checkered flag, red flag, etc) 184.144.161.119 (talk) 05:55, 10 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 22:13, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Reality check (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 22:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as cruft. I don't see the point. Jehochman ^Talk 16:38, 10 January 2011 (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) 23:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Russian krais (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Russian oblasts (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Russian republics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to Template:Subdivisions of Russia. Mhiji 22:22, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete (as the creator of the first one in the list). These haven't been used for quite a while now; they can safely be deleted.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); January 10, 2011; 15:30 (UTC)

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. WOSlinker (talk) 22:15, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. Pretty useless really, we don't need cleanup templates for individual sentences. Mhiji 22:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete while we do have cleanup templates for individual sentences (((cn))), this one is really big and kind of intrusive. It would disrupt the flow of an article. --- c y m r u . l a s s ^{(talk me, stalk me)} 15:42, 12 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 02:00, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Unused. No longer necessary. Mhiji 22:19, 9 January 2011 (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) 23:13, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, unnecessary. All links go to the same place, Roller_coaster#By_height Mhiji 22:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As described above this template is unused and unnecessary. I think it was created just for a user's reference 5 years ago. Themeparkgc  Talk  03:36, 10 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rolling Stone's 100 Best Songs of 2008 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Rolling Stone's 100 Best Songs of 2007 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Rolling Stone Top 50 Albums of 2007 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. No longer necessary. Mhiji 22:15, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

This template is used to identify that an article on another language Wikipedia would be useful for cleaning up the identified article. This template is inferior to Template:Expand language. If the particular non-English Wikipedia article can be identified, as this template includes no parameteres, this template should be orphaned by replacement with "Expand language". Also, the label "foreign" is generally not accurate for referring to non-English languages, since English Wikipedia has no domesticity. Bsherr (talk) 22:14, 9 January 2011 (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) 23:14, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rajah Lakandula frigate (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Useless navbox. Mhiji 22:12, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There is no useful purpose for one ship to have it's own navbox that essentially goes nowhere. I am a member of wp:ships. Brad (talk) 23:07, 10 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 01:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RU internat squad start (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:RU internat squad player (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 22:09, 9 January 2011 (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) 23:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Quote box-left (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to ((Quote box|align=left)) Mhiji 22:05, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as noted. -— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 00:13, 14 January 2011 (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) 23:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Soft deleted (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Part of the failed proposal WP:Soft deletion. No longer necessary. Mhiji 21:59, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete per T2 misrepresents deletion policies. --- cymru.lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 22:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. With the notice on it that it's part of a failed proposal, I don't think it can be mistaken as misrepresenting policy. But I do believe the historical value is minimal, and the template can be deleted. --Bsherr (talk) 01:47, 10 January 2011 (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) 23:18, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 21:55, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, Template:· works fine for this purpose. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 18:06, 14 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 01:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 21:55, 9 January 2011 (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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:20, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Secret Story (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused duplicate of Template:Big Brother France Mhiji 21:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect, clearly a duplicate. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 18:04, 14 January 2011 (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) 23:21, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Scripps TV Stations (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to Template:EWS CORP Mhiji 21:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Mhiji is correct. --Bsherr (talk) 22:19, 9 January 2011 (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) 23:21, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Scripps Networks (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to Template:SCRIPPS NET Mhiji 21:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Mhiji is correct. --Bsherr (talk) 22:19, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 01:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sarawak at the Commonwealth Games (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Pointless navbox. All red links Mhiji 21:48, 9 January 2011 (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) 23:22, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. Redundant to Template:Scales Mhiji 21:47, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• SUPPORT DELETION as the information is duplicated across the two templates 77.198.218.213 (talk) 21:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Mhiji is correct. --Bsherr (talk) 22:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Nothing significant now seems to use it. Feline Hymnic (talk) 20:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing at all... Mhiji 20:36, 10 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 01:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Saint Helena political parties (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Pointless navbox. Mhiji 21:43, 9 January 2011 (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) 23:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sail Spars (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to Template:Sail Types Mhiji 21:43, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• SUPPORT DELETION as information is duplicated across the two templates. Boatman (talk) 21:55, 9 January 2011 (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. Unused by Wikipedia:Meetup/San Francisco 5 & Wikipedia:Meetup/San Francisco 6 WOSlinker (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:San Francisco meetup 6 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:San Francisco meetup 5 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. The meetups have now been and gone... And they are redundant to ((San Francisco meetup)) anyway. Mhiji 21:40, 9 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 23:15, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Saffron archives (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Talk:Saffron now uses ((Archive box)) Mhiji 21:39, 9 January 2011 (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) 23:30, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Todo for V1.0 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. No longer necessary. Mhiji 21:35, 9 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 22:20, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, unnecessary. Doesn't make sense... Mhiji 21:35, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 21:33, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep this is a user-talk namespace (I'm guessing) template, and as such should be subst'ed, which accounts for the lack of transclusions. I think it's quite a nice gesture, actually. --- cymru.lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 23:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although the user who used it has been indef blocked and they were the only person using it (see the links here). There's no reason to keep it any more. Also, we already have ((Thank you)) and others. Mhiji 23:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, agree with explanation in the comments by Mhiji, above. -- Cirt (talk) 01:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or userfy on request. Many unique thank-you templates doesn't advance Wikipedia. The novel and particular can remain in the template namespace, but everything else should be userfied. --Bsherr (talk) 17:16, 10 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Thailand Squad 1956 Summer Olympics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navbox. All red links. Mhiji 21:33, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Would be nothing more than clutter even if it contained anything but redlinks. Resolute 20:46, 12 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:29, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Texas A&M Colleges (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to Template:Texas A&M University Mhiji 21:32, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:29, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Texas Tech Colleges (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to Template:Texas Tech University Mhiji 21:32, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Mhiji is correct. --Bsherr (talk) 22:21, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:29, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TennisAt1924SummerOlympics (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnnecessary. All red links. Mhiji 21:31, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, could be easily recreated using one of the templates in Category:Tennis at the Summer Olympics navigational boxes if the articles are created. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 18:01, 14 January 2011 (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. G2. WOSlinker (talk) 22:55, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tata Group1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 21:25, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:28, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 21:23, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete along with Template:TallestBuildingRow and Template:TallestBuildingTop or move all three to userspace. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 17:59, 14 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. No longer necessary. Mhiji 21:22, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Taiwan independence (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused. Redundant to Template:Politics of the Republic of China Mhiji 21:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete , I don`t think this template is redundant to Template:Politics of the Republic of China, but if it is unused then it should be deleted. Adrian (talk) 09:04, 14 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. No longer needed. The WikiProject is now inactive. Mhiji 21:18, 9 January 2011 (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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Unused, unnecessary. Redundant to Template:WikiProject Television and Template:Talk header. Mhiji 21:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect. I've added Template:TVSeriesTalk, since it's similar, and the outcome for one should probably be the outcome for the other. I propose redirecting these templates to Template:Notaforum. It's not apparent to me that these TV-specific templates provide any benefit over the former. --Bsherr (talk) 17:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree, also delete ((TVSeriesTalk)) for the same reasons. Mhiji 17:31, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Notified WT:WikiProject Television. --Bsherr (talk) 17:30, 10 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused. Not touched since November 2008. Not helpful. The links all go to one page, List of The Price Is Right pricing games too so it's not useful for navigation. Mhiji 21:05, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, the date span information is in that article, so this no info lost. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 17:58, 14 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TOC centuries (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, unnecessary. Mhiji 21:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, old and unused. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 17:56, 14 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Location map of (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Location map of Iran (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Fork of Template:Location map. It appears this was forked to improve compatibility with Internet Explorer, but it's not clear if this is still necessary. In addition, we should strive to make cross-browser templates, rather than programming for one in particular. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• What was the compatability problem? 134.253.26.4 (talk) 17:54, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  No idea, given that it was never put into widespread use, I am guessing it wasn't a serious problem. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:22, 16 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Twitter Titans Cricket Club squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox for an article that was speedily deleted. cymru.lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 20:42, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as depending on a deleted page. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 17:49, 14 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:1996 UCI Road World Championships (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused navbox. All red links. Useless! Mhiji (talk) 17:52, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, template now in use. Thaf (talk) 13:43, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I still think delete, since there's only one blue link. WP:NENAN. Mhiji (talk) 13:56, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, I don't like Mhiji's argument that "there's only one blue link". In the future, if someone creates the other articles, it will be useful. HeyMid (contribs) 21:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why not? Navboxes are to aid navigation between existing articles. This doesn't do that. It's unlikely those articles will ever be written anyway - the further it gets from 1996, the less likely they are to be written. How does the navbox being on this page help anyone? It doesn't aid navigation, it just clutters up the page. We can userfy it for now if required, but it isn't useful in it's current state. Mhiji 21:14, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Clutter? There's a whopping two templates at the bottom of the page. Indifferent as to deletion, but "clutter" seems a bit silly. Green-eyed girl (Talk · Contribs) 02:36, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, but how does it help anyone by being there? Mhiji 09:31, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This is certainly a disputed issue, but I'm of the opinion that navboxes with red links serve to expand Wikipedia by providing readers suggestions for new articles. --Bsherr (talk) 17:34, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A navbox with nothing to navigate to is of no value. Resolute 15:03, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A navbox with no navigational value is useless. The farther away we get from 1996 the less likely those articles are to ever being created. -DJSasso (talk) 16:51, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to userspace, if articles are created, it can be moved back. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 17:48, 14 January 2011 (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 no consensus Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:47, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:West Germany Squad 1980 Mundialito (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

One-off international tournament. The squads are listed at 1980 Mundialito squads and there is no need for a template to be put onto all players articles. Tikiwont (talk) 12:55, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep the tournament is considered equivalent to the FIFA Confederations Cup, and we have templates for those. It's a senior, major competition, the fact that it was a one-off isn't important. ArtVandelay13 (talk) 12:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Considered equivalent by whom? The participants are certainly differently selected than the Confed Cup. Moreover the German squad merely was invited and participated at this event but successful participation or at least qualification would also matter. Isn't there some discussion on when to have such a template or are they just propagated by analogy? --Tikiwont (talk) 13:08, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - it's a navbox which links lots of articles (i.e. serves its purpose!) about a notable subject (international football tournament) - no harm in keeping it. GiantSnowman 17:31, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per GiantSnowman. Nfitz (talk) 20:32, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Participating in such a tournament is a notable fact of an athlete's career, but other players who participated in same is not. Templates such as this cause massive amounts of clutter in articles. Resolute 15:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your first point indicates a "Keep" opinion. Your second point is a subjective opinion that is not accepted policy or guideline, and is not a valid deletion argument. --Dweller (talk) 17:02, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quite the opposite, actually. People have this silly notion that because a person's participation in an event is notable, a template listing other participants of the same event is appropriate. My rationale attempts to split the two, as they are not automatically joined. For instance, we do not have a ((2010 Grammy Award performers)) template, though it may be beneficial to note on the artist pages themselves that they made such a performance. As far as opinions not supported by policy, the first two keeps are WP:NOHARM and your opinion is just as subjective - we aren't debating the notability of the tournament, and as with the Grammy example, the notability of an event does not automatically create value for a template. Resolute 18:49, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of community consensus that such templates generically should not be used, can we please focus attention on the deletion arguments regarding this particular one? --Dweller (talk) 13:37, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, if we can't show via example how ridiculous this template is, it becomes that much harder to challenge, eh? This template, like all of its peers, is simply the template equivalent of overcategorizing a performer by performance. Personally, I would like to hear if there is an argument for keeping beyond WP:ILIKEIT. Resolute 15:05, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've argued Keep on the grounds of notability. But the burden at XfD is on finding grounds for deletion, not retention, as Wikipedia is notpaper. Arguing delete because you personally dislike this type of template and have no consensus supporting you, is not an argument based on policy and is therefore, ironically, essentially IDON'TLIKEIT. --Dweller (talk) 15:20, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually burden of proof at XfD is on those wishing to keep. -DJSasso (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you implying that no consensus would result in default delete? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, but he used the broad word XfD....articles for example have to proove they are notable, they aren't notable by default and then have to be prooven non notable. -DJSasso (talk) 17:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but in a deletion discussion, the burden of proof really is on those wishing to prove the case for deletion because, as you accept, the default position (of no consensus) is to keep. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:28, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on how you look at it. To me no-consensus just means there was enough consensus to keep it for now but not enough to declare the article an outright keep. In other words to give the article a chance to be fixed (if possible). The burden of proof is still on the person creating the article and those wishing to keep it to proove that the article is notable. No-consensus is just a holding pattern to give them the chance to do that. -DJSasso (talk) 17:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, no consensus in a deletion discussion means that the closing admin weighed up the pros and cons and decided that there was insufficient argument in favour of deletion. Not that there was sufficient argument in favour of keep. "No consensus to delete" articles, templates, whatever, go on to exist (rightly so) for years. It's not a holding pattern, it's an indication that deletion is inappropriate. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No if the closing admin weighed up there was no arguement in favour of deletion then the close is Keep. And if there is no strong arguement for keep then the close is Delete. If there is a mixture of the two with neither being stronger then its no-consensus which essentially means we can't decide right now. -DJSasso (talk) 17:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why say no when you agreed with me? No consensus defaults to keep (which isn't a holding pattern, nor a "we can't decide", it's no consensus to delete) hence the burden is on the nominator to prove deletion. Anyway, this is pure digression. Let's focus on the topic in hand. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:48, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because I don't think its no consensus to delete. Its no consensus to take either action. The decision is a let's leave it at status quo because there has been no decision either way. Which is why we say it defaults to keep. Yet its not an actual keep. But yes, it is a digression. -DJSasso (talk) 17:51, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We aren't debating the notability of the tournament, so your argument of keep on the basis of notability is irrelevant. The question is whether this template is useful, not whether the subject it aims to link are notable. Resolute 20:24, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep If the tournament is notable, the template is appropriate. If the tournament is not, this TfD should naturally follow a successful AfD on the tournament article. --Dweller (talk) 17:03, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Resolute and nom. Per WP:EMBED links in navigational lists should already occur in each page that the navbox is used on. Every player on a given team is not going to be featured on the page of every other player the box is used on. -DJSasso (talk) 16:43, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Resolute, the template is useful. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't be an ass. If you want to make your own arguments, make them. Given that you have made no argument, leave my name out of your response. Resolute 20:51, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• DO NOT make personal attack on other users! What kind of Admin are you? CTJF83 chat 20:57, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• *sigh* One who is not interested in having my name dragged into dumb comments like "keep per the guy who !voted delete". Especially when the comment has no valid argument attached. I actually quite respect Rambling Man's work, and I am well aware that I am arguing a minority position here, but if you want to challenge my arguments, challenge them. Don't insult my intelligence. That said, since you are offended, I've struck the comment. Resolute 21:28, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Check again, I'm not offended. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I didn't expect you would be. Ctjf83, however, was. Resolute 02:57, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Not offended, pointing out an admin should more than know better not to make personal attacks. CTJF83 chat 03:03, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry for the brief reply, I was busy watching a re-run of the 1978 FA Cup Final and my boys won again! I merely responded to the comment "We aren't debating the notability of the tournament, so your argument of keep on the basis of notability is irrelevant. The question is whether this template is useful, not whether the subject it aims to link are notable." and therefore I suggest we keep the template because I think it's a useful navigation tool. As far as I can see, it does no harm to have a useful navigable template, so that's why I agreed with Resolute's argument to debate its usefulness. It is useful, so keep. And 1-0 to the Tractor Boys. Wahey! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:48, 12 January 2011 (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. WOSlinker (talk) 16:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Murugan temples (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

No practical use foreseeable. This template contains only internal links separated by commas, an effect that could be reproduced easily without a template. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 08:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Template:Famous Murugan temples. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 17:46, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Now that I know of the existence of the template the IP mentions, my vote would change from delete to redirect as well. This can be closed at any time, as I withdraw my deletion nomination in favor of redirecting. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 18:22, 14 January 2011 (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 as a test page. It was apparently a test of citation markup. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 18:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cita publicación (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not really a template, more of a citation for a single thing/ cymru.lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 08:29, 9 January 2011 (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. JPG-GR (talk) 19:21, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Los Beverly de Peralvillo (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template with only 4 links, one of them a crew/cast member of the TV series. All of them are linked through the main article or can be linked through a "See also" section. WP:NENAN. --LoЯd ۞pεth 05:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NENAN. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:34, 9 January 2011 (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) 00:20, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Una familia de diez (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template with only 3 links, one of them a crew/cast member of the TV series. All of them are linked through the main article. WP:NENAN. --LoЯd ۞pεth 05:12, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NENAN. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:34, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not everything needs a navbox. --- cymru.lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 20:48, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Links through the articles is the better solution. --Bsherr (talk) 17:36, 10 January 2011 (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. Part of the reason given for deletion has been proven false. No prejudice toward future noms if the Wikiproject is involved and notified. JPG-GR (talk) 19:20, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cartoon Network-Outreach (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Useless template. This template was never subst to user talk pages. JJ98 (Talk) 04:06, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Invalid nomination claiming it was "never substituted", see here and here. Given that these are both from 2008, it is probably fair to say it won't be used again, but claiming it was never used is simply false. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 17:44, 14 January 2011 (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) 00:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New South Wales locality list (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template that is a single link to a non-existent page on an external website AussieLegend (talk) 03:35, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, old, unused and broken. 134.253.26.4 (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2011 (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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Futurama episode (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to ((Infobox television episode)) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:22, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Agree that we shouldn't make series-specific episode templates. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and Auntof6 YardsGreen (talk) 08:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As the others have said, there's no need for a series-specific episode infobox. --- cymru.lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 20:43, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I think the nominator may misunderstand the purpose of this template. It's not redundant to "Infobox television episode", it's a wrapper for it, meaning the template itself transcludes "Infobox television episode". The benefit of using wrappers is their convenience and standardization. If one needs to change information, for example, for an entire television series, one can do it on the wrapper template and the changes carry through to all the transclusions. Likewise, when new articles are created, using the wrapper is easier than filling in the same information over and over again. Wrappers are beneficial for the encyclopedia. --Bsherr (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep what Bsherr said, but also why shouldn't a series have its own template if there are enough usages for it? SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
• Keep You all are missing two key additions to this infobox....this one has "Opening caption" and "Opening cartoon" which is show specific that TV infobox doesn't have....much like Template:Infobox Simpsons episode has couch/chalkboard gags. CTJF83 chat 01:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per Bsheer and CTJF's comments. — Hunter Kahn 20:00, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. Nergaal (talk) 02:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Bsherr and Ctjf93. --Dorsal Axe 22:13, 12 January 2011 (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.