From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 5

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; deleted as G6 by Ronhjones ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 02:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix species template with only 3 links. Legacypac ( talk) 19:30, 5 May 2016 (UTC) reply

I've removed all transclusions. Legacypac ( talk) 21:23, 11 May 2016 (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).
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; deleted as T3 by Xaosflux ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 19:11, 11 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix species template like others up for deletion Legacypac ( talk) 19:29, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 02:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix species template like the others supported for deletion. Not helpful. Legacypac ( talk) 19:28, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 02:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix template related to a highway. Appears unused. Legacypac ( talk) 19:23, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 02:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix species nav box. Not helpful. Legacypac ( talk) 19:22, 5 May 2016 (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).
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; deleted as G6 by Ronhjones ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 02:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Unused template by Neelix. Legacypac ( talk) 08:58, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 03:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix Template for one of his favorate authors. Links only three things making it not very helpful. Legacypac ( talk) 08:56, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 03:04, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

No useful navigation. Sixth o f March 04:53, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 03:06, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

No useful navigation. Sixth o f March 04:46, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 deletePlastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:59, 14 May 2016 (UTC) reply

unused and not particularly helpful for navigation ~ Rob Talk 03:12, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 03:07, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Needlesly complex single-use template(s). All three sub-pages have been given standardized names and are now transcluded directly. Useddenim ( talk) 00:32, 5 May 2016 (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).
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 5

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; deleted as G6 by Ronhjones ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 02:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix species template with only 3 links. Legacypac ( talk) 19:30, 5 May 2016 (UTC) reply

I've removed all transclusions. Legacypac ( talk) 21:23, 11 May 2016 (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).
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; deleted as T3 by Xaosflux ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 19:11, 11 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix species template like others up for deletion Legacypac ( talk) 19:29, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 02:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix species template like the others supported for deletion. Not helpful. Legacypac ( talk) 19:28, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 02:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix template related to a highway. Appears unused. Legacypac ( talk) 19:23, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 02:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix species nav box. Not helpful. Legacypac ( talk) 19:22, 5 May 2016 (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).
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; deleted as G6 by Ronhjones ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT 02:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Unused template by Neelix. Legacypac ( talk) 08:58, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 03:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Neelix Template for one of his favorate authors. Links only three things making it not very helpful. Legacypac ( talk) 08:56, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 03:04, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

No useful navigation. Sixth o f March 04:53, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 03:06, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

No useful navigation. Sixth o f March 04:46, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 deletePlastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:59, 14 May 2016 (UTC) reply

unused and not particularly helpful for navigation ~ Rob Talk 03:12, 5 May 2016 (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).
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 03:07, 13 May 2016 (UTC) reply

Needlesly complex single-use template(s). All three sub-pages have been given standardized names and are now transcluded directly. Useddenim ( talk) 00:32, 5 May 2016 (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).

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook