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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Largest cities of Western Norway (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The is already Template:Largest cities of Norway, why another one for Western Norway? Surplus to requirements. Night of the Big Wind _talk 19:16, 14 January 2012 (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; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 02:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Irish school (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

undocumented; redundant to ((Infobox school)). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:57, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• delete, very limited in features, and better served by the generic school infobox. Frietjes (talk) 20:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete—as redundant. Imzadi 1979 → 22:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - don't you think it would be a good idea to advise the Ireland project that this is up for deletion? Fmph (talk) 09:00, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Why would you bring up a discussion and not involve the Ireland project and still, while in discussion just go ahead and remove it anyway without any decision to do so. Is this discussion mechanism even taken seriously by those allegedly voting on it? In particular I have noted Frietjes and 174.56.57.138 of such actions. You should also note that I have not voted either way as no good case has been put forward for/against. DubhEire (talk) 10:36, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I've looked into this further and I can see that there were edits to the Infobox Irish school by Frietjes. I can't determine the reason for the edits, but I can presume it was to simplify the template in order to compare with Infobox School. So in that case comparing both templates I can see that Infobox School holds every field that Infobox Irish school has. Infobox Irish school perhaps was trying to make it easier to specify Irish schooling year names, considering both templates were started in 2005. But this would be dealt with in a generic way in Infobox School and led by the examples in the documentation, and I'm sure by actual usage in articles.

But I am still interested in the reason for the hasty removal. The reasoning is very compact and light. It would appear to be an open shut case in hindsight, but perhaps hold your horses just a bit and bring some people in. So in that case

• Delete, but it's already been eradicated. DubhEire (talk) 21:09, 19 January 2012 (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) 15:16, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

The template lists random websites mostly unrelated to each other, in a way other than "all being wikis", contradicting WP:NAVBOX: "The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent.". WP:NAV suggests that "If the articles are not established as related by reliable sources in the actual articles, then it is probably not a good idea to interlink them." 212.87.13.66 (talk) 11:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Better served by a category. – Pnm (talk) 19:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I would see this more as a category, since these wikis aren't affiliated with each other, except the fact that all of them are wikis. Cutecutecuteface2000 (Cutecuteface needs attention) 02:33, 21 January 2012 (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) 15:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ludeco FC squad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

All articles have been PRODed due to failing notability guidelines. Cloudz679 09:46, 14 January 2012 (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) 14:50, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Omaha expressways (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The content of this template is also in ((Omaha transport)) and both navboxes are present on the same articles. Either the duplication needs to be removed, or this template needs to be deleted. Imzadi 1979 → 03:07, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indifferent. When I created this template I wanted to add icons, like Template:Chicagoland expressways has. Nowadays this is beyond my level of interest, and I'm indifferent about what happens to this template. • Freechildtalk 14:46, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not necessary. --Rschen7754 20:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Redundant to ((Omaha transport)). Dough4872 18:51, 20 January 2012 (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.