July 22
Template:Venezuelan subdivisions
- 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) 03:47, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Venezuelan subdivisions (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
This is not a real template, it is just a group of tables and maps that should appear only in mainspace (if at all). eh bien mon prince (talk) 21:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete speedy per nom. It doesn't have any transclusions. Banhtrung1 (talk) 14:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This is a very informative template, but not a very useful one. The purpose of templates is to contain information that should be in many articles so that it does not have to be added piecemeal each time. That's not the case with this template, and as such it appears it is not being used at all. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:45, 28 July 2013 (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.
User:DavidLeighEllis/Uw-unwelcome
- 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 for multiple reasons:
AnomieBOT⚡ 19:02, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Note to closer - the location of this template changed after 15:30, 22 July 2013. Some of the delete !votes may not have been cast for a user space template. VQuakr (talk) 05:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Template:Uw-unwelcome (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:User:DavidLeighEllis/Uw-unwelcome (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Obviously a completely inappropriate user talk template. this is not how we handle disruptive users, and the formatting looks awful as well. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:05, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, salt, burn with fire Very inappropriate creation, not humourous so it cannot even be marked that way (✉→BWilkins←✎) 18:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Over the top would be a gross understatement. We have standard templates that do a better job without being such an obnoxious eyesore. Also, anybody who thinks that vandal patrolling is comparable to police work either has a low opinion of cops or a very inflated opinion of vandal fighting. --Bongwarrior (talk) 18:26, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep so that it can be used in the extreme circumstances which do actually merit it. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 19:27, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no circumstance, ever that would justify such an infantile, unhelpful response. We have templates already for such situations that were developed through a collaborative, consensus based process as well as input from WMF staffers, as opposed to just throwing together a string of childish insults and some terrible formatting. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:38, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per duh. The creator of this template seems to be headed for a topic ban from vandal patrolling if they cannot follow WP:BITE and stop troll-feeding. And I agree, our vandal patrols need to be less police-ish, not more. VQuakr (talk) 19:33, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Then who would you have us act the part of? Vigilantes armed with rollback? That hardly encourages self-restraint. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 02:01, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- How about custodial assistants, or library volunteers? VQuakr (talk) 03:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - This is not an appropriate warning template regardless of what one might think of trolls. -- Whpq (talk) 20:52, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete because it looks like it would cause more damage than the trolls themselves. Ginsuloft (talk) 21:02, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Userfied and marked as humor, just like User:Shoemaker's Holiday/Lolblock which serves as a viable precedent for retention. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:10, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I further note that, as the template is now in my userspace, deletion from TFD would be ultra vires. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:14, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Consensus here is clearly very strong in favor of deletion, not userfication. It is not beyond the power of the community to undo this attempted fait accompli and delete this anyway.
That being said, I guess it's harmless enough languishing unused in your userspace, so long as it is clear that it is never, ever to be used as an actual warning template. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:37, 23 July 2013 (UTC) Maybe it is harmless, but I think it is important that we not cave unto this ham-handed attempt to do an end run around consensus, and that we send a message that not everything can or should be saved by userfying it and adding a "humor" tag. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:43, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - It isn't humourous, nor is it humour given your original claim in your "keep" !vote in which you expect it to be "used in the extreme circumstances which do actually merit it". -- Whpq (talk) 03:02, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, that struck me as pretty disingenuous as well. There was certainly no mention of humor up until now, seems like a convenient excuse to use to try and save this. what purpose is served by saving a template that you can't actually use, (other than to try and "win" this debate by attempting to make it moot) I can't imagine. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Still delete, even in userspace, given the user's history with similar edits on newbie talk pages. See also WP:GAME and WP:IAR re the ultra vires claim. VQuakr (talk) 03:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note - Template has been moved to User:DavidLeighEllis/Uw-unwelcome -- Whpq (talk) 10:35, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete; utterly unacceptable. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:52, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Not humourous and not appropriate. The whole "I moved it to user space so you cant touch it nya nya nya" nonsense doesn't help either. Resolute 13:26, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- delete. Frietjes (talk) 15:17, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Requested speedy deletion, CSD U1 As vehemently as I disagree with the consensus in this discussion, I concede that the community has an extreme distaste for this template/userpage. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 17:58, 26 July 2013 (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) 03:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It has too much red link so this navbox is unnecessary.
Other navboxes should be deleted:
- Template:Thailand men's football squad 2010 Asian Games (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- : it is not used in any article.
I created them. Now I have recognized: no need to create team sport (such as football, handball) navboxes of continental multi-sport events, such as Pan American Games, Asian Games. So all remaining navboxes of the continental multi-sport events should be extinct. Banhtrung1 (talk) 09:38, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete We don't need navboxes for every single team of any kind that ever competed at the Asian Games, as even the creator of these admits. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:07, 22 July 2013 (UTC).[reply]
- Delete I certainly have no issue with the event itself, but there's absolutely no need for individual squad templates, as per Beeblebrox (✉→BWilkins←✎) 18:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 July 23#Template:United Arab Emirates men's football squad 2010 Asian Games. Sawol (talk) 08:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I've never seen a need for such templates for any event. We certainly do not need to be cluttering articles with regional events. Resolute 13:27, 25 July 2013 (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.