The result of the discussion was Delete. Per WP:CSD#T2 and NFCC is policy, therefore no flag template can ever contain a non-free image. — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 16:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
template incorporating nonfree image, facilitating the use of the nonfree image in articles without specific NFCC rationale. Violates WP:NFCC #s 9 and 10c. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 15:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:43, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Doesn't work; recently created; no point in having it around. I suppose it could be substituted, but really what's the point? — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was move to userspace Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
This is far too cumbersome to be a navbox or sidebar, so it will never be used on many articles—presently, it's just one. Suggest subst: and delete. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 08:22, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:35, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Massive (35K) navigation template with more than 500 redlinks, and even so it is still incomplete. Only used on two articles ( Queen's Awards for Enterprise) and 2 Entertain), it links together articles based on a minor aspect, the winning of one minor award presented to about 100 companies per year (expanding the 2000s section gives an idea of the scale of this). Winners include rather unconnected entities like the University of Nottingham, the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants and Land Rover: the navigational template adds little to nothing to such articles, and when completed would be immense (apparently some 5,815 awards have been given so far since 1966). Fram ( talk) 07:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:33, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Template has only one link, which is red, and has only one transclusion. Dianna ( talk) 02:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus, the template has been renamed and revised during the discussion. Feel free to renominate it if you still feel it should be deleted. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
POV template which class designated terrorist groups in kashmir freedom groups Darkness Shines ( talk) 01:00, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
{{
Kashmir conflict}}
-- all that needs to be done is to include all aspects of the conflict within that. There's no reason to create this or any of the other sillies that RP is listed out. These are crystal clear violations of #4 and it's quite evident from the template talk page that this is the intention. —
Spaceman
Spiff
15:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)The result of the discussion was Delete. Per WP:CSD#T2 and NFCC is policy, therefore no flag template can ever contain a non-free image. — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 16:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
template incorporating nonfree image, facilitating the use of the nonfree image in articles without specific NFCC rationale. Violates WP:NFCC #s 9 and 10c. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 15:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:43, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Doesn't work; recently created; no point in having it around. I suppose it could be substituted, but really what's the point? — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was move to userspace Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
This is far too cumbersome to be a navbox or sidebar, so it will never be used on many articles—presently, it's just one. Suggest subst: and delete. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 08:22, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:35, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Massive (35K) navigation template with more than 500 redlinks, and even so it is still incomplete. Only used on two articles ( Queen's Awards for Enterprise) and 2 Entertain), it links together articles based on a minor aspect, the winning of one minor award presented to about 100 companies per year (expanding the 2000s section gives an idea of the scale of this). Winners include rather unconnected entities like the University of Nottingham, the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants and Land Rover: the navigational template adds little to nothing to such articles, and when completed would be immense (apparently some 5,815 awards have been given so far since 1966). Fram ( talk) 07:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:33, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Template has only one link, which is red, and has only one transclusion. Dianna ( talk) 02:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The result of the discussion was no consensus, the template has been renamed and revised during the discussion. Feel free to renominate it if you still feel it should be deleted. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
POV template which class designated terrorist groups in kashmir freedom groups Darkness Shines ( talk) 01:00, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
{{
Kashmir conflict}}
-- all that needs to be done is to include all aspects of the conflict within that. There's no reason to create this or any of the other sillies that RP is listed out. These are crystal clear violations of #4 and it's quite evident from the template talk page that this is the intention. —
Spaceman
Spiff
15:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)