(Redirected from
Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2007 July 30)
- 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 keep. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 02:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
It is for people who aren't contributing in English, yet it's written in English... Whats the point? The receiver isn't going to be able to read it. — AC Best Autograph Book 21:41, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep That's a huge presumption, just because someone makes a post in one language, certainly doesn't imply that they cannot speak English. I think there maybe one or two people around who have English as their second or third language. This template is a polite reminder that whilst on English wikipedia dialogue should be held in English, and is actually to aid other editors who cannot speak the other language, to enable them to fully understand the conversation.
Khu
kri
23:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- There are a bunch of people that do not have English for a first language here. T Rex | talk 19:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. This template isn't for monolingual people, but rather bi- or multilingual people who post messages in languages other than English. — Psychonaut 23:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep Obviously if you're on English Wikipedia you would realize that you couldn't read anything and leave if you can't speek English. Plus that's a big assumption to be said.-- Kk r ou ni 23:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep useful template. IPSOS ( talk) 01:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep-As said above, it's useful and meant for bilingual people. --( Review Me) R Parlate Contribs @ (Let's Go Yankees!) 03:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Reasons to keep this template are already stated above. -- Hdt83 Chat 03:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as per all the above comments. Useful in a common situation. If someone posts here who really knows no english at all, it is a different problem, but IME a less common one. DES (talk) 03:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep You need to be able to read english to figure out how to communicate on here, so they obviously understand it. Maybe we need uw-english|lang= and translate it into every possible language? Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 21:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep As per comments above, a very useful template, and it is much more likely that contributors to English Wikipedia can speak English, than that they cannot. John Hayes talk 16:10, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. If you don't understand English, there's no reason for your being on en.wikipedia.org, unless you're a vandalbot. Vandalbots wouldn't understand it anyway. Bart133 (t) (c) 17:32, 1 August 2007 (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 section.
- 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 delete. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 02:18, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't know why this exists. Nothing links to it and it is exactly the same as {{ loop}}. — Bob • ( talk) • 06:58, July 30, 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Nothin's usin' it, and it looks like it was just an experiment. -- Mikeblas 15:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete I feel it would not help any article, and as far as I know we already have something like it.-- Kk r ou ni 00:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Unschool 14:23, 31 July 2007 (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 section.
- 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 Speedy delete per CSD G6 (housekeeping). TfD is not needed for this. IronGargoyle 15:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
The userbox that was here was migrated to the original creator's user pages, and all substantial uses of the template have since been replaced to use the new location. The remaining uses are on an archived talk page (which I am loath to edit) and on the creator's talk page (in a comment I wrote). coldacid 06:36, 30 July 2007 (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 section.
- 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 no consensus. — METS501 ( talk) 15:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Template:2000 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2001 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2002 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2003 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2004 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2005 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2006 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Used on just two articles (the respective year's All-Star Game and the main page for the Home Run Derby) instead of actually putting the text into the articles. Substituted the text, so the template can go, and have them be recreated if more of a need is demonstrated (a la {{ 2007 Home Run Derby}}. fuzzy510 21:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- Added 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2006 templates. -- fuzzy510 00:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Recreate? Why not simply keep them? Just because they're only used on a few pages doesn't mean they have to be deleted. Having them in template format gives them more usability for other pages.
GlassCobra
01:43, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- But why keep them in the template namespace? The events have already happened, the information's not changing. Why keep these templates around and encourage similar creation of templates to replace actually putting text in articles? -- fuzzy510 03:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand your reluctance. What's so bad about having templates in an article? Having them in the article, having them in the template namespace, what's the difference? GlassCobra 04:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Bleh. This is, again, where a table namespace (as proposed) could be useful. Gracenotes T § 05:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Useful and it could be used on other articles. It just isn't. I will say that if the vote is for delete, then the Home Run Derby category will need to be deleted as well. -- Woohookitty Woohoo! 10:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Subst and Delete - Tables and tournament charts for past sporting events are not kept as templates. - 52 Pickup 13:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, IronGargoyle 02:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep and unsubstitute for maintenance reasons. Looking at Home Run Derby, it is not clear why some names are centered in some tables while others are aligned left. Having to know to change this in both places is a hassle. It's also possible though unlikely that the wikilinks need to be updated in the future for disambiguation. – Pomte 02:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- Subst and Delete as per 52 Pickup. If they remain unsubstituted they will use up extra resources for no real gain (as they will not change). John Hayes talk 16:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- Subst and delete Not used on enough pages or complex enough to warrant templates. Circeus 00:56, 3 August 2007 (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 section.
(Redirected from
Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2007 July 30)
- 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 keep. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 02:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
It is for people who aren't contributing in English, yet it's written in English... Whats the point? The receiver isn't going to be able to read it. — AC Best Autograph Book 21:41, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep That's a huge presumption, just because someone makes a post in one language, certainly doesn't imply that they cannot speak English. I think there maybe one or two people around who have English as their second or third language. This template is a polite reminder that whilst on English wikipedia dialogue should be held in English, and is actually to aid other editors who cannot speak the other language, to enable them to fully understand the conversation.
Khu
kri
23:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- There are a bunch of people that do not have English for a first language here. T Rex | talk 19:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. This template isn't for monolingual people, but rather bi- or multilingual people who post messages in languages other than English. — Psychonaut 23:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep Obviously if you're on English Wikipedia you would realize that you couldn't read anything and leave if you can't speek English. Plus that's a big assumption to be said.-- Kk r ou ni 23:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep useful template. IPSOS ( talk) 01:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep-As said above, it's useful and meant for bilingual people. --( Review Me) R Parlate Contribs @ (Let's Go Yankees!) 03:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Reasons to keep this template are already stated above. -- Hdt83 Chat 03:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as per all the above comments. Useful in a common situation. If someone posts here who really knows no english at all, it is a different problem, but IME a less common one. DES (talk) 03:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep You need to be able to read english to figure out how to communicate on here, so they obviously understand it. Maybe we need uw-english|lang= and translate it into every possible language? Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 21:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep As per comments above, a very useful template, and it is much more likely that contributors to English Wikipedia can speak English, than that they cannot. John Hayes talk 16:10, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. If you don't understand English, there's no reason for your being on en.wikipedia.org, unless you're a vandalbot. Vandalbots wouldn't understand it anyway. Bart133 (t) (c) 17:32, 1 August 2007 (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 section.
- 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 delete. Sr13 is almost Singu larity 02:18, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't know why this exists. Nothing links to it and it is exactly the same as {{ loop}}. — Bob • ( talk) • 06:58, July 30, 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Nothin's usin' it, and it looks like it was just an experiment. -- Mikeblas 15:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete I feel it would not help any article, and as far as I know we already have something like it.-- Kk r ou ni 00:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Unschool 14:23, 31 July 2007 (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 section.
- 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 Speedy delete per CSD G6 (housekeeping). TfD is not needed for this. IronGargoyle 15:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
The userbox that was here was migrated to the original creator's user pages, and all substantial uses of the template have since been replaced to use the new location. The remaining uses are on an archived talk page (which I am loath to edit) and on the creator's talk page (in a comment I wrote). coldacid 06:36, 30 July 2007 (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 section.
- 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 no consensus. — METS501 ( talk) 15:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Template:2000 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2001 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2002 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2003 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2004 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2005 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Template:2006 Home Run Derby ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Used on just two articles (the respective year's All-Star Game and the main page for the Home Run Derby) instead of actually putting the text into the articles. Substituted the text, so the template can go, and have them be recreated if more of a need is demonstrated (a la {{ 2007 Home Run Derby}}. fuzzy510 21:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- Added 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2006 templates. -- fuzzy510 00:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Recreate? Why not simply keep them? Just because they're only used on a few pages doesn't mean they have to be deleted. Having them in template format gives them more usability for other pages.
GlassCobra
01:43, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- But why keep them in the template namespace? The events have already happened, the information's not changing. Why keep these templates around and encourage similar creation of templates to replace actually putting text in articles? -- fuzzy510 03:04, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand your reluctance. What's so bad about having templates in an article? Having them in the article, having them in the template namespace, what's the difference? GlassCobra 04:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Bleh. This is, again, where a table namespace (as proposed) could be useful. Gracenotes T § 05:08, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Useful and it could be used on other articles. It just isn't. I will say that if the vote is for delete, then the Home Run Derby category will need to be deleted as well. -- Woohookitty Woohoo! 10:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Subst and Delete - Tables and tournament charts for past sporting events are not kept as templates. - 52 Pickup 13:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, IronGargoyle 02:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep and unsubstitute for maintenance reasons. Looking at Home Run Derby, it is not clear why some names are centered in some tables while others are aligned left. Having to know to change this in both places is a hassle. It's also possible though unlikely that the wikilinks need to be updated in the future for disambiguation. – Pomte 02:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- Subst and Delete as per 52 Pickup. If they remain unsubstituted they will use up extra resources for no real gain (as they will not change). John Hayes talk 16:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- Subst and delete Not used on enough pages or complex enough to warrant templates. Circeus 00:56, 3 August 2007 (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 section.