From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 24

Template:Hainish Cycle

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) ~ Rob13 Talk 02:29, 6 July 2016 (UTC) reply

I appreciate the intent behind this template, but it appears to be entirely redundant with Template:Ursula K. Le Guin, which is also used in the places that this one is. Delete. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 21:42, 24 June 2016 (UTC) reply

  • delete per nom, redundant navigation. Frietjes ( talk) 16:51, 28 June 2016 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as redundant, but would redirection be useful, instead? —PC -XT + 22:16, 2 July 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).

Template:Cite HOT

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. There was some discussion of deleting (or redirecting/merging) the other template, but that can be handled in another nomination if necessary. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob13 Talk 02:35, 6 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Duplicates Template:Handbook of Texas — Maile ( talk) 20:18, 24 June 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).

Template:Link entity

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 relist to July 7Primefac ( talk) 02:43, 7 July 2016 (UTC) reply

only used in one article, should be substituted and deleted. due to the complexity, this system should be rewritten in lua if we need it. Frietjes ( talk) 18:36, 24 June 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).

Template:Table row Dutch town

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)  Primefac ( talk) 04:08, 7 July 2016 (UTC) reply

only used in one article, should be substituted and deleted. due to the complexity, this system should be rewritten in lua if we need it. Frietjes ( talk) 18:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: hardly any easier to use than an ordinary sortable table. - HyperGaruda ( talk) 08:37, 4 July 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).

Template:Table row Dutch municipality with province

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 18:45, 2 July 2016 (UTC) reply

unused in article space. due to the complexity, this system should be rewritten in lua if we need it. Frietjes ( talk) 18:32, 24 June 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).

Template:Multicol

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 relisted here. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 18:43, 2 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Propose merging Template:Multicol with Template:Col-begin.
They obviously do the same thing and their auxiliary templates too. Dvorapa ( talk) 14:23, 24 June 2016 (UTC) reply

support, assuming we also merge all the sibling templates (e.g., col-break, col-end, ...) Frietjes ( talk) 22:33, 26 June 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).

Template:Post-orgasmic diseases

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. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 18:40, 2 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Unnecessary navbox. Keilana ( talk) 00:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Disagree. The template is useful. It groups together similar medical conditions and related terminology. It does not violate any of the WP:TFD#REASONS. POIS22 ( talk) 14:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob Talk 03:21, 24 June 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

June 24

Template:Hainish Cycle

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) ~ Rob13 Talk 02:29, 6 July 2016 (UTC) reply

I appreciate the intent behind this template, but it appears to be entirely redundant with Template:Ursula K. Le Guin, which is also used in the places that this one is. Delete. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 21:42, 24 June 2016 (UTC) reply

  • delete per nom, redundant navigation. Frietjes ( talk) 16:51, 28 June 2016 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as redundant, but would redirection be useful, instead? —PC -XT + 22:16, 2 July 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).

Template:Cite HOT

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. There was some discussion of deleting (or redirecting/merging) the other template, but that can be handled in another nomination if necessary. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob13 Talk 02:35, 6 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Duplicates Template:Handbook of Texas — Maile ( talk) 20:18, 24 June 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).

Template:Link entity

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 relist to July 7Primefac ( talk) 02:43, 7 July 2016 (UTC) reply

only used in one article, should be substituted and deleted. due to the complexity, this system should be rewritten in lua if we need it. Frietjes ( talk) 18:36, 24 June 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).

Template:Table row Dutch town

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)  Primefac ( talk) 04:08, 7 July 2016 (UTC) reply

only used in one article, should be substituted and deleted. due to the complexity, this system should be rewritten in lua if we need it. Frietjes ( talk) 18:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: hardly any easier to use than an ordinary sortable table. - HyperGaruda ( talk) 08:37, 4 July 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).

Template:Table row Dutch municipality with province

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 18:45, 2 July 2016 (UTC) reply

unused in article space. due to the complexity, this system should be rewritten in lua if we need it. Frietjes ( talk) 18:32, 24 June 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).

Template:Multicol

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 relisted here. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 18:43, 2 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Propose merging Template:Multicol with Template:Col-begin.
They obviously do the same thing and their auxiliary templates too. Dvorapa ( talk) 14:23, 24 June 2016 (UTC) reply

support, assuming we also merge all the sibling templates (e.g., col-break, col-end, ...) Frietjes ( talk) 22:33, 26 June 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).

Template:Post-orgasmic diseases

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. ( non-admin closure) ~ Rob Talk 18:40, 2 July 2016 (UTC) reply

Unnecessary navbox. Keilana ( talk) 00:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Disagree. The template is useful. It groups together similar medical conditions and related terminology. It does not violate any of the WP:TFD#REASONS. POIS22 ( talk) 14:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob Talk 03:21, 24 June 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