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 section.
Oppose merge instead of keeping the loading at {{coords}}, I think that non-terrestrial coordinates should be separated out into a separate template set. One advantage is that someone cannot accidentally choose a non-Earth link for coords, and a non-terrestrial template can require a world be set, so will not accidentally link to an Earthly coordinate. --
65.94.171.126 (
talk)
04:43, 14 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Merge—per nomination. If a little bit of editing can make it so that coord handles what this does, it will be simpler to support the one template than to try to update both in the future. As for the comments that this is repetitive, if a past TfD result says that there should be a TfM proposal, and then there is that TfM, the nominator should not be faulted for refactoring per the discussion. In any case, the proposal has merit and should be discussed, not closed procedurally. Imzadi 1979→06:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Procedural Oppose, until such time this is discussed at
Template talk:Coord or some other venue more suitable for discussion. Sorry Andy, but I don't think that repeatedly re-nominating the same template with the same rationale is a particularly helpful or constructive thing to do.
Lankiveil(
speak to me)03:06, 15 June 2014 (UTC).reply
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 section.
Oppose They are known films with their own articles, thus qualifying them for a template. It also helps readers navigate to the films more smoothly. So I don't see a reason why the template should be deleted.
Arbero (
talk)
11:27, 10 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Indifferent, seems she is still active so it would be kind of pointless to delete it just to recreate it. but, recreating it would also be trivial.
Frietjes (
talk)
14:50, 12 June 2014 (UTC)reply
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 section.
Oppose merge instead of keeping the loading at {{coords}}, I think that non-terrestrial coordinates should be separated out into a separate template set. One advantage is that someone cannot accidentally choose a non-Earth link for coords, and a non-terrestrial template can require a world be set, so will not accidentally link to an Earthly coordinate. --
65.94.171.126 (
talk)
04:43, 14 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Merge—per nomination. If a little bit of editing can make it so that coord handles what this does, it will be simpler to support the one template than to try to update both in the future. As for the comments that this is repetitive, if a past TfD result says that there should be a TfM proposal, and then there is that TfM, the nominator should not be faulted for refactoring per the discussion. In any case, the proposal has merit and should be discussed, not closed procedurally. Imzadi 1979→06:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Procedural Oppose, until such time this is discussed at
Template talk:Coord or some other venue more suitable for discussion. Sorry Andy, but I don't think that repeatedly re-nominating the same template with the same rationale is a particularly helpful or constructive thing to do.
Lankiveil(
speak to me)03:06, 15 June 2014 (UTC).reply
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 section.
Oppose They are known films with their own articles, thus qualifying them for a template. It also helps readers navigate to the films more smoothly. So I don't see a reason why the template should be deleted.
Arbero (
talk)
11:27, 10 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Indifferent, seems she is still active so it would be kind of pointless to delete it just to recreate it. but, recreating it would also be trivial.
Frietjes (
talk)
14:50, 12 June 2014 (UTC)reply
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.