The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:12, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Free Studio (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is a template for list of programs that are not notablie enough to have articles of their own, see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Free_Video_Dub. CombatWombat42 (talk) 23:31, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:G11 Leondz (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete. I concur with the G11 rationale. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:53, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Professional wrestling in Australia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Too few links to warrant a template and no chance of expansion due to lack of notable promotions. Several have already been deleted via AfD. 121.214.28.96 (talk) 20:34, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• delete, but make sure they are all connected through the see also sections. Frietjes (talk) 01:52, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Parliament of Lebanon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, all the entries in this navbox are redlinks apart from the title article. NSH002 (talk) 20:06, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• delete Frietjes (talk) 01:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:U.S. strikes in Bajour/Waziristan (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A template is not the best place for the content, which is best dealt with in a list article - in this case, List of drone strikes in Pakistan. The template is years out of date, but any content not already in the list article should be merged there. NSH002 (talk) 19:52, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• follow-up I went through the content of this template, and compared it with List of drone strikes in Pakistan. All the drone attacks in the template are also in the list article, and where they differ, the list article is more accurate in its detail (as one would expect for cited material). I copied the remaining material to my sandbox for now, in case anyone might be able to make use of it, but I don't really think anything would be lost were the template deleted. The template should really be deleted as article content in template space. --NSH002 (talk) 20:18, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• delete after making sure all the relevant articles link to the list in the see also section. Frietjes (talk) 20:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Greek cuisine mezes (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Apparently just some see also text and not really of value. Only use from 'what links here' is from the talk page. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• delete Frietjes (talk) 01:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• I would say subst and delete, but there do not seem to be any transclusions, so just delete —PC-XT+ 07:10, 26 February 2014 (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, with no reason it cannot be revived if there is work on regional cuisine articles. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:41, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chilean cuisine (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

only used on one page, and I can't really see adding it to the other pages linked in the template since they are either red links, or it would cause layout problems (or undue weight). I could see reformatting it as a navbox, but we already have Template:Cuisine of Chile. Frietjes (talk) 16:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• While it's somewhat aenemic at the moment, it stands to reason that it'd eventually be fleshed out as our coverage of the region improves. That said, it could easily be recreated from scratch in a couple of minutes when that time comes. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 17:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 18:47, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for now or merge — This template seems to focus more on cuisine than specific food. In past discussions of this type, (Turkish, Pakistani, Indian,) I have !voted different ways. Generally, if the template is limited to a series on types of cuisines, I'll tend to say keep and if it is only used as a second navbox, I'll say delete. Note: Template:Armenian cuisine is also up for deletion. —PC-XT+ 08:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • the current trend is for sidebars to cover regional cuisine varieties, and navboxes to cover dishes, ingredients, etc. given that there are no active links in the regional cuisine part, I don't see why we need a sidebar. this is probably why there is only one transclusion. Frietjes (talk) 01:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • You said it better than I did. I only included "keep for now" in case someone starts to work on the regional cuisine varieties. Even so, however, I'm not sure it needs a whole template for so few relevant links, and nobody seems to have worked on it, so I'm changing to straight delete. It can always be remade after the articles appear. If someone wants to argue to preserve it, feel free to ping me or ask on my talk page to change to my original !vote, and we can talk about it. —PC-XT+ 07:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:14, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pakistani people (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, redundant to ((Culture of Pakistan)). NSH002 (talk) 14:15, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• delete or merge. Frietjes (talk) 01:27, 26 February 2014 (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 relisted on 2014 March 23 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:21, 23 March 2014 (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 redirected Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:47, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox American Political party (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

We already have this one: Template:Infobox American political party. eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Boldly redirected. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:36, 20 February 2014 (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 merge Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox residency show (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

New creation with two transclusions; it could be replaced by Template:Infobox concert tour if the residency show article is to be trusted. eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:49, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as redundant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:31, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to ((Infobox concert tour)). Adabow (talk) 01:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, setting Type=Residency show on ((Infobox concert tour)) would display "Residency show tour", which doesn't make any sense. It would be good if someone could find a fix for this, then I'd support redirection. Adabow (talk) 02:00, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See also ((Infobox concert)), as used at 4 Intimate Nights with Beyoncé. Adabow (talk) 02:02, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; that's the only reason I created a separate template. The concert one only is meant to be used for articles such as U2 concert in Sarajevo. — Status (talk · contribs) 15:09, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing that would be the best solution. Unfortunately, it's currently hard- coded, so that |type=World renders as "World tour". We could do with a bot to change values to, say, |type=World tour. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I read the discussion and I agree that the template 'Concert tour' should be modified in order to choose the right kind of show. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 18:07, 28 February 2014 (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 redirected Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox visual artist (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Created three days ago but we already have Template:Infobox artist. eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:47, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Boldly redirected. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:46, 20 February 2014 (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 as G7 by 28bytes (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 21:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox route map (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not an Infobox. Only six transclusions. As can be seen on Vestfold Line, this is simply a wrapper put around map templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:56, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete if required, an option to collapse should be added to Template:Vestfold Line map and the others.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Equivalent to ((collapse)), if needed that could be expanded. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 02:20, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• delete, it was intended as a temporary fix, which is no longer needed. Frietjes (talk) 14:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Only two transclusions. Redundant to ((Infobox fictional planet)) (Transclusion count: 42). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:57, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and replace with standard.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:10, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Stargate race (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only three transclusions. Redundant to ((Infobox fictional race)) (Transclusion count: 44). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and replace with standard.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 13:10, 20 February 2014 (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) 04:15, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox musician awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Should be merged into, or refactored as a module for use within, ((Infobox musical artist)). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose The two templates have completely different uses. Compare List of awards and nominations received by Madonna to Madonna (entertainer). Adabow (talk) 03:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per above Seltaeb Eht (talk) 01:17, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for the same reason. Frankly ridiculous nomination. Andre666 (talk) 15:51, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• General response to the above. The nomination is not at all ridiculous; there is no reason that each of the Madonna articles could not use a combined version of the template; if necessary with different parameters completed in each. One the other hand, consider, for example, The Strokes, one of many cases where both templates are used in one article. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:27, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Andy, could you show me an example of how that would work? Adabow (talk) 06:21, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • How what would work? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Using ((infobox musician)) in List of awards and nominations received by Madonna. Adabow (talk) 21:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Pigsonthewing: Adabow (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Adabow: Sorry, missed your reply. I can't show you because the templates are not yet merged; but I can explain: You'd use an instance of ((infobox musical artist)) on her awards page, including a photo, but omitting parameters like her birth place, as desired. Then, either ((Infobox musician awards)) would be included at the base of that template, or its parameters would already have been added to it and you would complete them as you do at present. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • OK, I understand what you mean now, but that seems like merging just for the sake of merging; the template would have two functions for two completely different types of articles. What are the benefits of merging? Adabow (talk) 22:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, having one template would reduce maintenance overhead. Secondly, those articles which currently display both templates would only display one in future. That will also have benefits for sites, such as DBpedia, which parse our templates to extract the data. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose I agree with the majority of the editors. This template should be kept.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 22:31, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Young Artist Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only fourteen transclusions. Redundant to ((Infobox film awards)). Note that this and ((Infobox Youth In Film Awards)) (below) refer to the same event. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• delete, after replacing with ((infobox film awards)). Frietjes (talk) 23:11, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Youth In Film Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only twenty transclusions (no more expected). Redundant to ((Infobox film awards)). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• delete, after replacing with ((infobox film awards)). Frietjes (talk) 23:11, 3 March 2014 (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) 01:49, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Logie Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only six transclusions. Redundant to ((Infobox film awards)). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:39, 20 February 2014 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:39, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Specifically created for the Logie Awards articles. Includes specific parameters of Gold Logie and Hall of Fame. Articles for each year awards exist and the infobox can be included on each page -- Ianblair23 (talk) 05:54, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – Per Ianblair23's comments. I've been recently tidying some of the articles and adding this infobox. Lesahna01 (talk) 04:09, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Update: I have added |gold= (labelled "Gold award") and |hall_of_fame=) to ((Infobox film awards)), and made a sample substitution. It is thus clear that there is no need for a separate template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:03, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• delete after replacing it. I added Logie Awards here to the film awards template, so now the labels link properly as well. Frietjes (talk) 23:10, 3 March 2014 (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) 01:49, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Hum Awards (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only three transclusions. Redundant to ((Infobox film awards)). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as redundant. —Psychonaut (talk) 12:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Will you please elaborate that why this temmplae is nominated for deletion? and what does Transclusions means? what further changes can saved this template from deletion? Fushan007
    • Transclusions means how often it is actually used. 121.214.28.96 (talk) 08:10, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Even if it were used more often, redundant means only one of the two mentioned templates is needed, and this one is not as general as the other one. If you think this one is better, you can suggest it be merged into the other template. —PC-XT+ 08:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Update On reviewing this; there was in fact only one transclusions, I have replaced it, and the template is now orphaned. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:38, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• I have put this template in 1st Hum Awards again. please review it and remove the deletion tag if the matter is resolved. thanks. Fushan007.
  • You don't say why you have done that, but as the prior version, using ((Infobox film awards)) shows, The Hum Awards infobox is utterly redundant. The matter is not resolved, and the Hum Awards template should be deleted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:12, 4 March 2014 (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.