The result of the debate was speedy delete (not by me) per user request. Shalom Hello 22:59, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Obvious test. — Old Hoss 20:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
It's my test. Go ahead and delete it. Aelffin 22:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete and move Template:Infobox GB school to Template:Infobox UK school. — Malcolm ( talk) 00:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Template:Infobox UK schools, Template:Infobox UK school, Template:Infobox College GB and Template:Infobox English Public School. The templates are depreciated in favour of Template:Infobox GB school and all schools/colleges using the templates have been moved to the GB School infobox. The depreciation took place in early June, so the template shouldn't be needed. I suggest that all four templates are deleted. (Sorry if I've made any mistakes with formatting here.) — CR7 18:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. — Malcolm ( talk) 00:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Template is empty and hasn't had anything added since 2005. Template:Administrative divisions of Russia is the template in use.. Russavia 17:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete If we have Template:Administrative divisions of Russia and this template is empty and not in use since 2005 -its obvious somebody was trying ways to draw up a template and forgot about it - then delete. As long as one currently in use is not up for deletion!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 17:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Redirect to the replacement Geolinks templates. Mike Peel 06:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Leftover Mapit/Geolinks duality. And let's throw in
Note that Template:Mapit-US-cityscale and Template:Mapit-AUS-suburbscale are NOT yet ready to be deleted because of hundreds of remaining references to them.-- SallyForth123 17:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Redirect to {{ unsigned}}. Whether or not a "please sign your posts" link should be added to the other two unsigned templates should be discussed on their talk pages. Mike Peel 07:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Functionally redundant with {{ unsigned}} except for the explicit admonition. However it also has a bug as its missing the trailing (UTC) which the archive bots pick up on. I propose that if they passes, a bot subst the <500 uses and delete the template. KelleyCook 14:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle 03:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Template of Wikiproject lace. The Wikiproject is inactive and the MFD is here/. SLSB talk 14:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was thanks to Betacommand who wrote an RFCbot, this is now officially moot. >Radiant< 08:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CANVASSING. These templates aren't canvassing, I'm sure everyone is well aware of that. But the previous debate got stuck on that issue for some reason.
A list of issues that require "wider attention" is a good idea. However, we already have at several such lists, to wit WP:RFC and WP:CENT. The problem with having multiple lists is that some people will watch and post at one of them, and some will watch and post at another, and people looking at one list can be quite unaware of the existence of the other. Therefore this defies the entire point of reaching out to people! Putting these issues in a single location will give them far more attention than spreading them out. >Radiant< 13:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
If the bot were to generate the template from the subpages of WP:RFC instead, that would solve the problem (which is that people now have to look at several places to get all their news). The problem is not with the existence of the template, but with its redundancy. >Radiant< 13:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Delete. Mike Peel 07:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
We don't do permission-only images any more. Only one transclusion, where I have notified the uploader. MER-C 13:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Delete. Mike Peel 07:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Just a template that was created a few months ago for a specific source of baseball statistics that has been swallowed up by a more general template. Deprecated and orphaned. Shoot it.-- SallyForth123 09:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete all. The individual keep !votes below do not provide convincing rationales for any particular template below to be exempt from the overall consensus for deletion.
IronGargoyle
02:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
The following film lists may be considered as one.
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Michael Caine. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is already subst'ed in the actor's article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top of the navbox in the main article. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Richard Burton. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is linked from the actor's article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete since a detailed filmography already exists at Richard Burton filmography. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Pierce Brosnan. It is currently transcluded in 2 film articles, a help desk archive, and the main actor article ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. So, remove all transclusions, subst into the actor article (and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top of the navbox) and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Marlon Brando. It is currently transcluded in one film article and the main actor article ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. As for the actor article, a detailed filmography already exists at Marlon Brando#Filmography. So, remove all transclusions and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actress, Jacqueline Bisset. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is already subst'ed in the actress' article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top of the navbox in the main article. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:03, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actress, Candice Bergen. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is linked from the actress' article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete since a detailed filmography already exists at Candice Bergen filmography. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:00, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actress, Ursula Andress. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is linked from the actress' article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete since a detailed filmography already exists at Ursula Andress filmography. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Isabelle Adjani. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is linked from the actress' article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Subst into the actor article (and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top) and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Robert De Niro. It is currently transcluded in 6 film articles and the main actor article ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. As for the actor article, a detailed filmography already exists at Robert De Niro filmography. So, remove all transclusions and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Catherine Deneuve. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere). Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete as unused and redundant to the filmography present in the main article. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:02, 6 August 2007 (
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Jane Fonda. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere). Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete as unused. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 01:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Gene Hackman. It is currently transcluded in 10 film articles and in the article on the actor ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. As for the actor's article, single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Subst into the actor article (and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top) and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 01:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Corey Haim. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere) and the main article already provides a filmography. So, delete as an unused single-use template. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Richard Harris. It is currently transcluded only in the article on the actor ( whatlinkshere). Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete since a detailed filmography already exists at Richard Harris filmography. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Audrey Hepburn. It is currently transcluded in 28 film articles and the main actor article ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. As for the actor article, it already has a detailed filmography. So, remove all transclusions and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Diane Keaton. It is currently transcluded in 7 film articles ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. So, remove all transclusions and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Aamir Khan. It is currently transcluded only on a user talk page ( whatlinkshere) and the main article already provides a detailed filmography. So, delete as an unused single-use template. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a one-year (for 2006 only) filmography template for a single actor, Ajith Kumar. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere) and the main article already provides a detailed filmography. So, delete as an unused single-use template. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:43, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Okay, let's start again. For some reason this debate got hung up on the issue of canvassing, which is entirely irrelevant. >Radiant< 13:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC) Yes, a list of issues that require "wider attention" is a good idea. However, we already have at least two such lists, to wit WP:RFC and WP:CENT (not to mention the village pump, which is frequently used for this purpose). By definition, having multiple forums for the same purpose is confusing, and putting these issues in a single location will give them far more attention than spreading them out. >Radiant< 08:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was keep ais523 14:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
This template is used to tag disambiguation pages for a WikiProject. However, all disambig pages are already tagged with {{ disambig}} or related templates and can be easily accessed via categories. Unneeded duplication of effort. — Renata 02:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was redirect as per below. MER-C 13:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Why would this template need to be used, with the four tildes currently standard right now? This template has become obsolete and should be deleted.. GrooveDog ( talk) 00:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was speedy delete (not by me) per user request. Shalom Hello 22:59, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Obvious test. — Old Hoss 20:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
It's my test. Go ahead and delete it. Aelffin 22:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete and move Template:Infobox GB school to Template:Infobox UK school. — Malcolm ( talk) 00:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Template:Infobox UK schools, Template:Infobox UK school, Template:Infobox College GB and Template:Infobox English Public School. The templates are depreciated in favour of Template:Infobox GB school and all schools/colleges using the templates have been moved to the GB School infobox. The depreciation took place in early June, so the template shouldn't be needed. I suggest that all four templates are deleted. (Sorry if I've made any mistakes with formatting here.) — CR7 18:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. — Malcolm ( talk) 00:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Template is empty and hasn't had anything added since 2005. Template:Administrative divisions of Russia is the template in use.. Russavia 17:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Delete If we have Template:Administrative divisions of Russia and this template is empty and not in use since 2005 -its obvious somebody was trying ways to draw up a template and forgot about it - then delete. As long as one currently in use is not up for deletion!!! ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you?" Contribs 17:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Redirect to the replacement Geolinks templates. Mike Peel 06:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Leftover Mapit/Geolinks duality. And let's throw in
Note that Template:Mapit-US-cityscale and Template:Mapit-AUS-suburbscale are NOT yet ready to be deleted because of hundreds of remaining references to them.-- SallyForth123 17:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Redirect to {{ unsigned}}. Whether or not a "please sign your posts" link should be added to the other two unsigned templates should be discussed on their talk pages. Mike Peel 07:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Functionally redundant with {{ unsigned}} except for the explicit admonition. However it also has a bug as its missing the trailing (UTC) which the archive bots pick up on. I propose that if they passes, a bot subst the <500 uses and delete the template. KelleyCook 14:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle 03:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Template of Wikiproject lace. The Wikiproject is inactive and the MFD is here/. SLSB talk 14:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was thanks to Betacommand who wrote an RFCbot, this is now officially moot. >Radiant< 08:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CANVASSING. These templates aren't canvassing, I'm sure everyone is well aware of that. But the previous debate got stuck on that issue for some reason.
A list of issues that require "wider attention" is a good idea. However, we already have at several such lists, to wit WP:RFC and WP:CENT. The problem with having multiple lists is that some people will watch and post at one of them, and some will watch and post at another, and people looking at one list can be quite unaware of the existence of the other. Therefore this defies the entire point of reaching out to people! Putting these issues in a single location will give them far more attention than spreading them out. >Radiant< 13:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
If the bot were to generate the template from the subpages of WP:RFC instead, that would solve the problem (which is that people now have to look at several places to get all their news). The problem is not with the existence of the template, but with its redundancy. >Radiant< 13:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Delete. Mike Peel 07:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
We don't do permission-only images any more. Only one transclusion, where I have notified the uploader. MER-C 13:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Delete. Mike Peel 07:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Just a template that was created a few months ago for a specific source of baseball statistics that has been swallowed up by a more general template. Deprecated and orphaned. Shoot it.-- SallyForth123 09:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete all. The individual keep !votes below do not provide convincing rationales for any particular template below to be exempt from the overall consensus for deletion.
IronGargoyle
02:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
The following film lists may be considered as one.
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Michael Caine. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is already subst'ed in the actor's article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top of the navbox in the main article. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Richard Burton. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is linked from the actor's article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete since a detailed filmography already exists at Richard Burton filmography. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Pierce Brosnan. It is currently transcluded in 2 film articles, a help desk archive, and the main actor article ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. So, remove all transclusions, subst into the actor article (and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top of the navbox) and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Marlon Brando. It is currently transcluded in one film article and the main actor article ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. As for the actor article, a detailed filmography already exists at Marlon Brando#Filmography. So, remove all transclusions and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actress, Jacqueline Bisset. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is already subst'ed in the actress' article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top of the navbox in the main article. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:03, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actress, Candice Bergen. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is linked from the actress' article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete since a detailed filmography already exists at Candice Bergen filmography. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 20:00, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actress, Ursula Andress. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is linked from the actress' article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete since a detailed filmography already exists at Ursula Andress filmography. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Isabelle Adjani. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere), but is linked from the actress' article. Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Subst into the actor article (and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top) and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Robert De Niro. It is currently transcluded in 6 film articles and the main actor article ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. As for the actor article, a detailed filmography already exists at Robert De Niro filmography. So, remove all transclusions and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Catherine Deneuve. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere). Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete as unused and redundant to the filmography present in the main article. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:02, 6 August 2007 (
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Jane Fonda. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere). Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete as unused. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 01:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Gene Hackman. It is currently transcluded in 10 film articles and in the article on the actor ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. As for the actor's article, single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Subst into the actor article (and, if possible, remove the "v • d • e" links at the top) and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 01:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Corey Haim. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere) and the main article already provides a filmography. So, delete as an unused single-use template. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Richard Harris. It is currently transcluded only in the article on the actor ( whatlinkshere). Single-use templates are unneeded and should exist as text in the main article. Delete since a detailed filmography already exists at Richard Harris filmography. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Audrey Hepburn. It is currently transcluded in 28 film articles and the main actor article ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. As for the actor article, it already has a detailed filmography. So, remove all transclusions and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Diane Keaton. It is currently transcluded in 7 film articles ( whatlinkshere). To avoid clutter, film articles should not contain filmography templates for individual actors, as individual films involve dozens of actors. So, remove all transclusions and delete. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a filmography template for a single actor, Aamir Khan. It is currently transcluded only on a user talk page ( whatlinkshere) and the main article already provides a detailed filmography. So, delete as an unused single-use template. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
This is a one-year (for 2006 only) filmography template for a single actor, Ajith Kumar. It is currently not transcluded anywhere ( whatlinkshere) and the main article already provides a detailed filmography. So, delete as an unused single-use template. — Black Falcon ( Talk) 00:43, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Okay, let's start again. For some reason this debate got hung up on the issue of canvassing, which is entirely irrelevant. >Radiant< 13:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC) Yes, a list of issues that require "wider attention" is a good idea. However, we already have at least two such lists, to wit WP:RFC and WP:CENT (not to mention the village pump, which is frequently used for this purpose). By definition, having multiple forums for the same purpose is confusing, and putting these issues in a single location will give them far more attention than spreading them out. >Radiant< 08:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was keep ais523 14:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
This template is used to tag disambiguation pages for a WikiProject. However, all disambig pages are already tagged with {{ disambig}} or related templates and can be easily accessed via categories. Unneeded duplication of effort. — Renata 02:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was redirect as per below. MER-C 13:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Why would this template need to be used, with the four tildes currently standard right now? This template has become obsolete and should be deleted.. GrooveDog ( talk) 00:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)