The result of the debate was delete. Garion96 (talk) 15:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Originally created when sortable tables were first available, but functionality superceded by
Template:sort. Usage of this template was of the form {{sortkey|invisible key|visible=no}} visible text
, but it is clearer to write {{sort|invisible key|visible text}}
. Having to write visible=no
for almost every instance was awkward and unnecessary. I have already updated all mainspace transclusions so that this template is already orphaned except for sandboxes, archives, and talk pages. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 23:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. Garion96 (talk) 15:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Per similar arguments for Template:Sortkey. — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 23:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was keep. Garion96 (talk) 15:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Unused soft redirect to a deprecated template - let's delete it to help move people away from {{ Non-free restricted use}} and move towards a more specific non-free content tag. — Remember the dot ( talk) 04:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was redirected Garion96 (talk) 10:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned template.
This template was in the process of being merged into the {{ Herbs and spices}} template by me when an other problematic editor, Badagnani, objected to the removal. A discussion whether to undo the merge or keep moving forward was launched by an admin, and after seven days there was no consensus reached on keeping the template separate so I continued with the merge. After I finished, I placed a speedy delete notice on the H&S mixture template which Badagnani removed repeatedly.
Badagnani then requested the TFD. In respose, I nominated the template with only a short summary of the situation, to which he replied with that I had done this without consensus or discussion in an aggressive move that went against community wishes; what he was really saying is that I did it without his consensus and against his wishes. Badagnani has a history of WP:OWN, 3R violations, edit warring and wikistalking, and this is yet another example of his abuse towards other editors in order to push his own personal agenda.
Badagnani's MO for situations like this is to bandy about wiki-buzzwords such as consensus and discussion in an attempt to make his own violations look to be legitimate. Please take a look at Badagnani's block log and you will see what I mean. This template more than qualifies for a speedy deletion, but is here solely as a result of Badagnani's disruptive behavior.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 18:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 06:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Only used in one article. Due to recent deletions and mergers, unlikely to be used anywhere else. Template presents no out-of-universe information and presents in-universe information as though real. Pagra shtak 14:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 06:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Unused and obsolete project banner. — PC78 ( talk) 12:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 07:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Redundant, single use out of date template. It was replaced with the standard infobox. — — MJCdetroit (yak) 12:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 07:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
The information in this template has been determined by several editors to be original research as well as irretrievably inaccurate, as such it is not to be used in the article for which it was made. There is a long standing consensus for this determination with the latest discussion here. I think the most recent move is towards the creation of a template pointing to the discussion not to use the info in this template. . . Thanks, — R. Baley ( talk) 22:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete because of WP:NOR and also because the graph is confusing and also it appears that certain drugs are listed with properties that they don't have, i.e. inaccurate. It is too large and bulky and is just not "wikipediaish", no other articles have these type of graphs. It might be good on the author's personal web site but not on wikipedia.-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 20:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 07:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Until a few moments ago, only transcluded on a single page, South Sea Islanders. Now replaced there by {{ Countries and territories of Oceania}}, so suggest the template is now defunct. — Sardanaphalus ( talk) 07:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. Garion96 (talk) 15:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Originally created when sortable tables were first available, but functionality superceded by
Template:sort. Usage of this template was of the form {{sortkey|invisible key|visible=no}} visible text
, but it is clearer to write {{sort|invisible key|visible text}}
. Having to write visible=no
for almost every instance was awkward and unnecessary. I have already updated all mainspace transclusions so that this template is already orphaned except for sandboxes, archives, and talk pages. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 23:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete. Garion96 (talk) 15:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Per similar arguments for Template:Sortkey. — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 23:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was keep. Garion96 (talk) 15:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Unused soft redirect to a deprecated template - let's delete it to help move people away from {{ Non-free restricted use}} and move towards a more specific non-free content tag. — Remember the dot ( talk) 04:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was redirected Garion96 (talk) 10:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned template.
This template was in the process of being merged into the {{ Herbs and spices}} template by me when an other problematic editor, Badagnani, objected to the removal. A discussion whether to undo the merge or keep moving forward was launched by an admin, and after seven days there was no consensus reached on keeping the template separate so I continued with the merge. After I finished, I placed a speedy delete notice on the H&S mixture template which Badagnani removed repeatedly.
Badagnani then requested the TFD. In respose, I nominated the template with only a short summary of the situation, to which he replied with that I had done this without consensus or discussion in an aggressive move that went against community wishes; what he was really saying is that I did it without his consensus and against his wishes. Badagnani has a history of WP:OWN, 3R violations, edit warring and wikistalking, and this is yet another example of his abuse towards other editors in order to push his own personal agenda.
Badagnani's MO for situations like this is to bandy about wiki-buzzwords such as consensus and discussion in an attempt to make his own violations look to be legitimate. Please take a look at Badagnani's block log and you will see what I mean. This template more than qualifies for a speedy deletion, but is here solely as a result of Badagnani's disruptive behavior.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 18:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 06:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Only used in one article. Due to recent deletions and mergers, unlikely to be used anywhere else. Template presents no out-of-universe information and presents in-universe information as though real. Pagra shtak 14:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 06:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Unused and obsolete project banner. — PC78 ( talk) 12:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 07:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Redundant, single use out of date template. It was replaced with the standard infobox. — — MJCdetroit (yak) 12:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 07:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
The information in this template has been determined by several editors to be original research as well as irretrievably inaccurate, as such it is not to be used in the article for which it was made. There is a long standing consensus for this determination with the latest discussion here. I think the most recent move is towards the creation of a template pointing to the discussion not to use the info in this template. . . Thanks, — R. Baley ( talk) 22:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete because of WP:NOR and also because the graph is confusing and also it appears that certain drugs are listed with properties that they don't have, i.e. inaccurate. It is too large and bulky and is just not "wikipediaish", no other articles have these type of graphs. It might be good on the author's personal web site but not on wikipedia.-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 20:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the debate was delete Woohookitty Woohoo! 07:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Until a few moments ago, only transcluded on a single page, South Sea Islanders. Now replaced there by {{ Countries and territories of Oceania}}, so suggest the template is now defunct. — Sardanaphalus ( talk) 07:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)