< January 21 | January 23 > |
---|
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 21:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Unneeded and now unused template that is obsoleted by the "links" section of {{ Infobox road}} and {{ Infobox state highway system}}. Admrboltz ( talk) 23:29, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 21:06, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Multiple previous consensus shows that actors & actresses should not have navigation templates for their filmography. Lugnuts ( talk) 13:52, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:28, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Not used. WP:VPC is gone. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Speedy delete, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 19:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Purpose unclear. (Note: protected with no items in protection log, which is very, very strange.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Wrong wiki (belongs on Commons). And besides, commons:Commons:Valued_images_candidates/candidate_list was deleted at Commons. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:07, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:30, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
An unused sea of redlinks. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:05, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:45, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Amboxes on template pages, eh? Practically no-one will ever see them. Unused. Also delete redirect {{ CVGnavbox-bloated}}. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. I don't think this is really encyclopedic information. However, it is in the article Juice Plus, so I suppose that isn't much of a reason. The main reason for deletion is that the actual code is in the article, and this template is not actually transcluded. So delete it to avoid duplication of information. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:00, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep. Airplaneman ✈ 05:41, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Since the municipalities in question don't seem to have articles, I don't know where this navbox is meant to be placed. Links to categories from navboxes are a bit iffy too. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. I really do get tired of saying formal-sounding things like "no scope for use" in cases like this. No documentation, no useful edit summaries, no transclusions, no incoming links... no applicable CSD!... Just delete the thing. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:37, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Deleted. Reh man 13:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Easier just to type it in than use this template. WOSlinker ( talk) 10:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused (effectively). Provides an estimate of Pakistan's current population based on... what? No source info provided. Pretty useless anyway. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:24, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ivy League business schools. Grouping a set of mainly graduate business schools by their undergraduate sports league affiliation does not make sense. While the term is colloquially used to refer to the schools collectively, doing so to group individual parts of those institutions, especially graduate schools, does not have any significance or notability. You would not have a list of Pac-10 medical schools. Jadunne ( talk) 07:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ivy League business schools. Grouping a set of mainly graduate business schools by their undergraduate sports league affiliation does not make sense. While the term is colloquially used to refer to the schools collectively, doing so to group individual parts of those institutions, especially graduate schools, does not have any significance or notability. You would not have a list of Pac-10 medical schools. Jadunne ( talk) 07:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ivy League business schools. Grouping a set of mainly graduate business schools by their undergraduate sports league affiliation does not make sense. While the term is colloquially used to refer to the schools collectively, doing so to group individual parts of those institutions, especially graduate schools, does not have any significance or notability. You would not have a list of Pac-10 medical schools. Jadunne ( talk) 07:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Declined speedy. The rest of these country "abbr" templates were deleted years ago. There are these three two left. —
This, that, and
the other (talk)
07:11, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. I really don't know what this is for. Also delete redirect {{ pages-page}}. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:01, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
A specific case of {{ Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}. Unused. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:52, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. I don't know what this is supposed to be. A navbar? An attempt at an infobox? Goodness knows. When you consider its use of external links, its hodge-podge layout, random information ("Language"), red links at bottom, and most of all its probable non-notability, I think this is worth deleting. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:02, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Old. No scope for use - pretending to be a hatnote, but isn't. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep most, but delete the orphaned ones, and no prejudice against renomination of a smaller, more targeted group. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
These are "single-use templates" - they contain information (climate data tables) that should only appear in one article.
I hope that all makes sense. These templates are just going to cause headaches for editors if they stay around.
Also, feel free to add other weatherbox templates to the nomination if you find them. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:58, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 21:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. 5 years old. Media should not be uploaded without a valid license; such consideration should occur before uploading. Creator blocked. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 21:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Purpose unclear. AFAICS, no scope for use. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 09:28, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Plainly useless. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:27, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete after merging with articles. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:39, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
These templates are "single-use templates" - the information they contain is only used in one article. For example, the information in {{ England FIFA World Cup record}} exists (in better condition) at England national football team#FIFA World Cup. Most of the templates have no transclusions. Those that do have a single transclusion in the team articles should be subst'ed and deleted. See earlier nomination of a single one of these templates, Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 January 17#Template:Denmark FIFA World Cup record. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
< January 21 | January 23 > |
---|
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 21:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Unneeded and now unused template that is obsoleted by the "links" section of {{ Infobox road}} and {{ Infobox state highway system}}. Admrboltz ( talk) 23:29, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 21:06, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Multiple previous consensus shows that actors & actresses should not have navigation templates for their filmography. Lugnuts ( talk) 13:52, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:28, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Not used. WP:VPC is gone. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Speedy delete, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 19:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Purpose unclear. (Note: protected with no items in protection log, which is very, very strange.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Wrong wiki (belongs on Commons). And besides, commons:Commons:Valued_images_candidates/candidate_list was deleted at Commons. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:07, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:30, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
An unused sea of redlinks. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:05, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:45, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Amboxes on template pages, eh? Practically no-one will ever see them. Unused. Also delete redirect {{ CVGnavbox-bloated}}. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. I don't think this is really encyclopedic information. However, it is in the article Juice Plus, so I suppose that isn't much of a reason. The main reason for deletion is that the actual code is in the article, and this template is not actually transcluded. So delete it to avoid duplication of information. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:00, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep. Airplaneman ✈ 05:41, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Since the municipalities in question don't seem to have articles, I don't know where this navbox is meant to be placed. Links to categories from navboxes are a bit iffy too. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. I really do get tired of saying formal-sounding things like "no scope for use" in cases like this. No documentation, no useful edit summaries, no transclusions, no incoming links... no applicable CSD!... Just delete the thing. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:37, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Deleted. Reh man 13:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Easier just to type it in than use this template. WOSlinker ( talk) 10:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused (effectively). Provides an estimate of Pakistan's current population based on... what? No source info provided. Pretty useless anyway. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:24, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ivy League business schools. Grouping a set of mainly graduate business schools by their undergraduate sports league affiliation does not make sense. While the term is colloquially used to refer to the schools collectively, doing so to group individual parts of those institutions, especially graduate schools, does not have any significance or notability. You would not have a list of Pac-10 medical schools. Jadunne ( talk) 07:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ivy League business schools. Grouping a set of mainly graduate business schools by their undergraduate sports league affiliation does not make sense. While the term is colloquially used to refer to the schools collectively, doing so to group individual parts of those institutions, especially graduate schools, does not have any significance or notability. You would not have a list of Pac-10 medical schools. Jadunne ( talk) 07:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ivy League business schools. Grouping a set of mainly graduate business schools by their undergraduate sports league affiliation does not make sense. While the term is colloquially used to refer to the schools collectively, doing so to group individual parts of those institutions, especially graduate schools, does not have any significance or notability. You would not have a list of Pac-10 medical schools. Jadunne ( talk) 07:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Declined speedy. The rest of these country "abbr" templates were deleted years ago. There are these three two left. —
This, that, and
the other (talk)
07:11, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. I really don't know what this is for. Also delete redirect {{ pages-page}}. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:01, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
A specific case of {{ Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}. Unused. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:52, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete. Airplaneman ✈ 05:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Unused. I don't know what this is supposed to be. A navbar? An attempt at an infobox? Goodness knows. When you consider its use of external links, its hodge-podge layout, random information ("Language"), red links at bottom, and most of all its probable non-notability, I think this is worth deleting. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:02, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Old. No scope for use - pretending to be a hatnote, but isn't. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was keep most, but delete the orphaned ones, and no prejudice against renomination of a smaller, more targeted group. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 18:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
These are "single-use templates" - they contain information (climate data tables) that should only appear in one article.
I hope that all makes sense. These templates are just going to cause headaches for editors if they stay around.
Also, feel free to add other weatherbox templates to the nomination if you find them. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:58, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 21:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. 5 years old. Media should not be uploaded without a valid license; such consideration should occur before uploading. Creator blocked. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 21:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Purpose unclear. AFAICS, no scope for use. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete. WOSlinker ( talk) 09:28, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Plainly useless. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:27, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was Delete after merging with articles. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:39, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
These templates are "single-use templates" - the information they contain is only used in one article. For example, the information in {{ England FIFA World Cup record}} exists (in better condition) at England national football team#FIFA World Cup. Most of the templates have no transclusions. Those that do have a single transclusion in the team articles should be subst'ed and deleted. See earlier nomination of a single one of these templates, Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 January 17#Template:Denmark FIFA World Cup record. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)