- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:22, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Collision Course track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:The Hunting Party track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hybrid Theory track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Living Things track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Meteora track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Minutes To Midnight track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Reanimation track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:A Thousand Suns track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Redundant to {{ Linkin Park songs}} as per past consensus on track listings. ~ Rob Talk 18:13, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. -- Izno ( talk) 12:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
- delete per precedent. redundant navigation. Frietjes ( talk) 22:13, 2 June 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was speedily deleted by Mkdw as per WP:G7. ~ Rob Talk 19:49, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Template:AEndorsed ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
This appears to be similar to {{ Endorse}} which is used at WP:SPI. If that was its intended use, then it's borderline eligible for WP:T2, since sysops can't endorse a request for CheckUser. Either way, it's entirely unused in the Wikipedia and Wikipedia talk namespaces (which are the only ones it could conceivably be used, I believe) other than a single transclusion on a list of discussion-related templates. There's a bunch of transclusions in the template namespace, but only because it's on a doc subpage shared by many discussion-related templates. I see no likely use for this. ~ Rob Talk 16:53, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy delete I have speedy deleted this under WP:G7 as the creator of the template. It was never used. Mkdw talk 19:40, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was no consensus. While there was no opposition, there was also no support, so I'm hesitant to list this at WP:TFD/H and increase that backlog. If you want to take on the merge yourself, I'd reocmmend just doing the merge and then renominating. Please don't orphan one of the templates before renominating; just make the edits to the templates themselves. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 05:01, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:U.S. premium television services (variety) with
Template:U.S. premium television services (PPV).
Overlapping content. Ambiguous criteria for including links to one vs. the other. PPV is a subset of premium (pay) television.
Osubuckeyeguy (
talk)
21:22, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob Talk 19:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob Talk 14:22, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 05:02, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced since April 2015. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Checked this one on wikidata and it's fine. This can go now too. Jane ( talk) 11:56, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete as unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 05:05, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Single transclusion, unreferenced and seems incomplete. I suggest whether subst to the article or delete. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:36, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 01:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced since April 2015. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Checked and this one is already done on Wikidata, so it can go. Jane ( talk) 11:43, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was keep. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 15:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced since April 2015. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep and improve. There's plenty of referencing in the articles about the people who are named. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 14:51, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- Query - Can you demonstrate a family tree which is referenced to your desired standards? And in what way is Wikipedia improved by its deletion? 92.26.162.36 ( talk) 16:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- The main sources for this family tree were here and here. Can these be added at the foot of the template? 92.26.162.36 ( talk) 13:31, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as the only grounds for deletion are lack of inline citations. 92.26.162.36 ( talk) 15:28, 9 June 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 15:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Single transclusion. No links. I suggest just copy to the main article. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Subst: and delete per nom —PC -XT + 23:16, 4 June 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:22, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
- Template:Collision Course track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:The Hunting Party track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Hybrid Theory track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Living Things track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Meteora track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Minutes To Midnight track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:Reanimation track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
- Template:A Thousand Suns track listing ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Redundant to {{ Linkin Park songs}} as per past consensus on track listings. ~ Rob Talk 18:13, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. -- Izno ( talk) 12:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
- delete per precedent. redundant navigation. Frietjes ( talk) 22:13, 2 June 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was speedily deleted by Mkdw as per WP:G7. ~ Rob Talk 19:49, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Template:AEndorsed ( talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
This appears to be similar to {{ Endorse}} which is used at WP:SPI. If that was its intended use, then it's borderline eligible for WP:T2, since sysops can't endorse a request for CheckUser. Either way, it's entirely unused in the Wikipedia and Wikipedia talk namespaces (which are the only ones it could conceivably be used, I believe) other than a single transclusion on a list of discussion-related templates. There's a bunch of transclusions in the template namespace, but only because it's on a doc subpage shared by many discussion-related templates. I see no likely use for this. ~ Rob Talk 16:53, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy delete I have speedy deleted this under WP:G7 as the creator of the template. It was never used. Mkdw talk 19:40, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was no consensus. While there was no opposition, there was also no support, so I'm hesitant to list this at WP:TFD/H and increase that backlog. If you want to take on the merge yourself, I'd reocmmend just doing the merge and then renominating. Please don't orphan one of the templates before renominating; just make the edits to the templates themselves. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 05:01, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Propose merging
Template:U.S. premium television services (variety) with
Template:U.S. premium television services (PPV).
Overlapping content. Ambiguous criteria for including links to one vs. the other. PPV is a subset of premium (pay) television.
Osubuckeyeguy (
talk)
21:22, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob Talk 19:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob Talk 14:22, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 05:02, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced since April 2015. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Checked this one on wikidata and it's fine. This can go now too. Jane ( talk) 11:56, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete as unopposed. WP:REFUND applies. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 05:05, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Single transclusion, unreferenced and seems incomplete. I suggest whether subst to the article or delete. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:36, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 01:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced since April 2015. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Checked and this one is already done on Wikidata, so it can go. Jane ( talk) 11:43, 30 May 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was keep. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 15:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Unreferenced since April 2015. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep and improve. There's plenty of referencing in the articles about the people who are named. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 14:51, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- Query - Can you demonstrate a family tree which is referenced to your desired standards? And in what way is Wikipedia improved by its deletion? 92.26.162.36 ( talk) 16:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
- The main sources for this family tree were here and here. Can these be added at the foot of the template? 92.26.162.36 ( talk) 13:31, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as the only grounds for deletion are lack of inline citations. 92.26.162.36 ( talk) 15:28, 9 June 2016 (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).
- 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).
The result of the discussion was delete. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 15:32, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Single transclusion. No links. I suggest just copy to the main article. Magioladitis ( talk) 11:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Subst: and delete per nom —PC -XT + 23:16, 4 June 2016 (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).