| < October 30 | November 1 > |
|---|
- 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 page.
The result of the debate was to not keep // Pilotguy ( Cleared to land) 00:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Per a discussion about Template:Nintendo franchises here, I really don't think this template provides anything useful to the reader. Also, per the previous discussion, it seems slightly POV for someone to decide whether or not a so-called "franchise" should be included. Axem Titanium 22:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Most of what is on the list contained in the template are obviously considered franchises. Square Enix is not like Nintendo when it comes to franchises.
Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando
10:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- But in light of its usefulness, do you think it's even necessary to be able to jump from say Drakengard to Star Ocean? The template itself has limited use since people would rarely have that sort of need. The more likely reaction would be either to go to the Square Enix page and click a link there or simply search for it. I don't see why this template is necessary when a category would suffice.
Axem Titanium
13:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- It is necessary to be able to jump from like Final Fantasy to Dragon Quest and vice versa, and to jump to Seiken Densetsu and to SaGa. The template is a shortcut for going between Square Enix franchises and to the company article itself. It makes the navigation easier. Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando 03:29, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Your reply doesn't address the question of chances of this actually occurring. Axem Titanium 00:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- But in light of its usefulness, do you think it's even necessary to be able to jump from say Drakengard to Star Ocean? The template itself has limited use since people would rarely have that sort of need. The more likely reaction would be either to go to the Square Enix page and click a link there or simply search for it. I don't see why this template is necessary when a category would suffice.
Axem Titanium
13:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of Square Enix deletions. Axem Titanium 13:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of Final Fantasy deletions. Axem Titanium 13:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. What is the point of the category page if there is a template like this one? If people wanted to jump from one series to another, they probably already know the game is from square-enix, or at least will be intelligent enough to go to the category page to look for other games. A template like this is just useless and waste loading time and page space. MythSearcher 12:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Andre ( talk) 02:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per the Nintendo franchises discussion. Hbdragon88 21:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and above. -- Ned Scott 01:13, 5 November 2006 (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 page.
- 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 page.
The result of the debate was deleteeeee // Pilotguy ( Cleared to land) 00:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Unused template; navlinks redirect to parent article Percy Snoodle 12:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom -- Ned Scott 01:13, 5 November 2006 (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 page.
| < October 30 | November 1 > |
|---|
- 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 page.
The result of the debate was to not keep // Pilotguy ( Cleared to land) 00:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Per a discussion about Template:Nintendo franchises here, I really don't think this template provides anything useful to the reader. Also, per the previous discussion, it seems slightly POV for someone to decide whether or not a so-called "franchise" should be included. Axem Titanium 22:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Most of what is on the list contained in the template are obviously considered franchises. Square Enix is not like Nintendo when it comes to franchises.
Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando
10:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- But in light of its usefulness, do you think it's even necessary to be able to jump from say Drakengard to Star Ocean? The template itself has limited use since people would rarely have that sort of need. The more likely reaction would be either to go to the Square Enix page and click a link there or simply search for it. I don't see why this template is necessary when a category would suffice.
Axem Titanium
13:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- It is necessary to be able to jump from like Final Fantasy to Dragon Quest and vice versa, and to jump to Seiken Densetsu and to SaGa. The template is a shortcut for going between Square Enix franchises and to the company article itself. It makes the navigation easier. Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando 03:29, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Your reply doesn't address the question of chances of this actually occurring. Axem Titanium 00:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- But in light of its usefulness, do you think it's even necessary to be able to jump from say Drakengard to Star Ocean? The template itself has limited use since people would rarely have that sort of need. The more likely reaction would be either to go to the Square Enix page and click a link there or simply search for it. I don't see why this template is necessary when a category would suffice.
Axem Titanium
13:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of Square Enix deletions. Axem Titanium 13:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been added to the list of Final Fantasy deletions. Axem Titanium 13:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. What is the point of the category page if there is a template like this one? If people wanted to jump from one series to another, they probably already know the game is from square-enix, or at least will be intelligent enough to go to the category page to look for other games. A template like this is just useless and waste loading time and page space. MythSearcher 12:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Andre ( talk) 02:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per the Nintendo franchises discussion. Hbdragon88 21:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and above. -- Ned Scott 01:13, 5 November 2006 (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 page.
- 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 page.
The result of the debate was deleteeeee // Pilotguy ( Cleared to land) 00:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Unused template; navlinks redirect to parent article Percy Snoodle 12:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom -- Ned Scott 01:13, 5 November 2006 (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 page.