The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty Woohoo! 07:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
This is consists of content which is mostly unrelated to Ron Paul. Even if it is not deleted, I still think that much of its content should be removed (like links to groups which he is a member of). Although a few other 2008 presidential candidates have them, they only use content which is relevant to the person. I suggest you compare Ron Paul's template to Barack Obama's or Rudy Giuliani's. We must also remember that Ron Paul is only a Congressman, and an underdog in the presidential race. Some of the other candidates that are more popular than him do not have templates of their own, much less templates which include information that is not relevant to the person. EvanS • talk | sign here 22:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was already under discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 December 23#Ordinal numbers. – Pomte 23:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't feel that template is necessary. Typing {{ 10th}} does the same thing as typing 10{{ th}} and using {{ th}} seems to be more acceptable (and versatile) a method than having all these templates lying around. The same can be said of {{ 11th}}, {{ 12th}}, etc. I may be out of my skull, but I think we should go so far as to discourage their use. → ɧʒЖχ ( ГДĽК • КОИГЯІВ) 19:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle ( talk) 03:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Delete this apparently redundant with Template:Sisterlinks. I found it improperly tagged for WP:PROD-deletion with the reason being "Orphan template". — User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 19:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle ( talk) 03:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Created as a possible alternative to {{ Buffyversenav}} but has hardly been touched in 2 years. Not in use and is an orphan. Doesn't seem to be any use for this any more. — kingboyk ( talk) 18:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle ( talk) 03:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Useless Template, just a subpage of main article. — Matthew_hk t c 06:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was keep. Rifleman 82 ( talk) 07:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
This is an advertising template made by one of the hired promoters involved in a recent big COI deal. It has no reason to remain.. Dicklyon ( talk) 06:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 08:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Template created (I believe) in error by new user while attempting to add an infobox to a school article. Delete template as unused and not correctly formed. The Education in Canada template has been used in the article ( Riverside Public School) article in question. — Kateshort forbob 00:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty Woohoo! 07:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
This is consists of content which is mostly unrelated to Ron Paul. Even if it is not deleted, I still think that much of its content should be removed (like links to groups which he is a member of). Although a few other 2008 presidential candidates have them, they only use content which is relevant to the person. I suggest you compare Ron Paul's template to Barack Obama's or Rudy Giuliani's. We must also remember that Ron Paul is only a Congressman, and an underdog in the presidential race. Some of the other candidates that are more popular than him do not have templates of their own, much less templates which include information that is not relevant to the person. EvanS • talk | sign here 22:36, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was already under discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 December 23#Ordinal numbers. – Pomte 23:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't feel that template is necessary. Typing {{ 10th}} does the same thing as typing 10{{ th}} and using {{ th}} seems to be more acceptable (and versatile) a method than having all these templates lying around. The same can be said of {{ 11th}}, {{ 12th}}, etc. I may be out of my skull, but I think we should go so far as to discourage their use. → ɧʒЖχ ( ГДĽК • КОИГЯІВ) 19:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle ( talk) 03:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Delete this apparently redundant with Template:Sisterlinks. I found it improperly tagged for WP:PROD-deletion with the reason being "Orphan template". — User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 19:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle ( talk) 03:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Created as a possible alternative to {{ Buffyversenav}} but has hardly been touched in 2 years. Not in use and is an orphan. Doesn't seem to be any use for this any more. — kingboyk ( talk) 18:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. IronGargoyle ( talk) 03:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Useless Template, just a subpage of main article. — Matthew_hk t c 06:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was keep. Rifleman 82 ( talk) 07:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
This is an advertising template made by one of the hired promoters involved in a recent big COI deal. It has no reason to remain.. Dicklyon ( talk) 06:12, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete -- Rifleman 82 ( talk) 08:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Template created (I believe) in error by new user while attempting to add an infobox to a school article. Delete template as unused and not correctly formed. The Education in Canada template has been used in the article ( Riverside Public School) article in question. — Kateshort forbob 00:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)