- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was keep. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:21, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Template:User legal userboxes
Unused userboxes from user:This, that and the other/Unused templates Bulwersator ( talk) 19:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
- Delete - Unused userbox. ~~ Hi878 (Come shout at me!) 22:53, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. See Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion#Unused userboxes. I do not see how being merely "unused" is a valid reason for deleting a userbox. Someone might want to use it some day. There are now a whole batch of nominations of this kind, too many for me to comment on all of them, but no valid reason has been given for deleting any of them. -- Bduke (Discussion) 00:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Keep or Procedural close. What is the policy-based reason being given for deletion? Please indicate where the unused criterion is documented (or supported by consensus somewhere). I don't use userboxes. Can they be substituted? My opinion is the same for all these analogous nominations. Thincat ( talk) 16:55, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Keep No policy is cited that would require deletion and the continued existence of the user box is doing no harm. Monty 845 19:08, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Is it really required to create sth like WP:STALEDRAFT to delete completely unused userboxes? Bulwersator ( talk) 21:21, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Keep potentially could be used. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 21:37, 16 September 2011 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was keep. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:21, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Template:User legal userboxes
Unused userboxes from user:This, that and the other/Unused templates Bulwersator ( talk) 19:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
- Delete - Unused userbox. ~~ Hi878 (Come shout at me!) 22:53, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. See Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion#Unused userboxes. I do not see how being merely "unused" is a valid reason for deleting a userbox. Someone might want to use it some day. There are now a whole batch of nominations of this kind, too many for me to comment on all of them, but no valid reason has been given for deleting any of them. -- Bduke (Discussion) 00:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Keep or Procedural close. What is the policy-based reason being given for deletion? Please indicate where the unused criterion is documented (or supported by consensus somewhere). I don't use userboxes. Can they be substituted? My opinion is the same for all these analogous nominations. Thincat ( talk) 16:55, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Keep No policy is cited that would require deletion and the continued existence of the user box is doing no harm. Monty 845 19:08, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Is it really required to create sth like WP:STALEDRAFT to delete completely unused userboxes? Bulwersator ( talk) 21:21, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Keep potentially could be used. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 21:37, 16 September 2011 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.