Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 June 15

< June 14	June 16 >

June 15

Template:Ccount

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.

The result of the discussion was Keep. Ruslik_Zero 19:09, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ccount (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is now obsolete. The contribs link this produces refers to Interiot's edit counter at the toolserver. Interiot's account on the toolserver is now expired and deleted, and the bot is no longer present, rendering the template useless. I submit this template to be deleted. BarkingFish ^{Talk to me} | ^{My contributions} 22:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SOFIXIT: One could avoid updating all the pages that suggest it could be useful by making it useful. Update the link to use toolserver.org/~vvv/yaec or toolserver.org/~soxred93/count. (I would do this right now myself, but real life calls. If someone does not beat me to it, I will have done so by this time tomorrow.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Template is now operational again: it links to the edit counter that is currently used at the foot of User Contributions pages. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:43, 21 June 2010 (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.

Template:Megapotetopageheader

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.

The result of the discussion was Userfy Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Megapotetopageheader (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Looks like an experiment by a user. Lightmouse (talk) 19:40, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move to userspace. -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy - nothing wrong with it as a userspace template. Claritas § 17:00, 16 June 2010 (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.

Template:McDube MenuRightDefault

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.

The result of the discussion was Userfy Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:00, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:McDube MenuRightDefault (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single User template. Should be in userspace. WOSlinker (talk) 18:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy, as the author himself said: "It is being used in at least my private namespace !!" Sorafune 話 16:12, 17 June 2010 (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.

Template:McDube Header

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.

The result of the discussion was Userfy Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:00, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:McDube Header (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Single User template. Should be in userspace. WOSlinker (talk) 18:38, 15 June 2010 (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.

Template:Polarwolfhp

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Polarwolfhp (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

As a lot of other hidden page stuff has been deleted before, I don't think there should be an award template for finding a specific hidden page in the template space. Should either be deleted or moved into userspace. WOSlinker (talk) 18:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Normally I would say to userfy a personal award template, but since I support deletion of "hidden page" games from userspace whenever I see them at WP:MFD, I see no reason to push the problem from one forum to another. --RL0919 (talk) 20:33, 23 June 2010 (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.

Template:The 4400 episode

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete. Ruslik_Zero 19:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The 4400 episode (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphaned template which is redundant to {{Infobox television episode}} Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I used to use that. It can be deleted now. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 19:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:19, 16 June 2010 (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.

Template:Infobox Boondocks character

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete. RL0919 (talk) 17:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Boondocks character (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox character}}, so I replaced it. No need for fields like "hair" in the infobox. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as above. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 18:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - like the others. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 18:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant with no justification for having a standalone box. Only "added" fields are unnecessary and excessively in-universe. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:15, 16 June 2010 (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.

Template:Infobox Arrested Development episode

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete after replacing transclusions with {{Infobox television episode}}. RL0919 (talk) 17:41, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Arrested Development episode (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

In the process of standardizing this template to look more like {{Infobox television episode}}, I noticed that there is little difference between this template and the standard. The only fields that are not in the main template are "On the next" and "On the epilogue", which do really not need to be in the infobox. I see no reason why these episodes can't use the standard. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as above. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 18:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - like the others. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 18:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant to {{Infobox television episode}} with no demonstrable added value for having its on special template. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:15, 16 June 2010 (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.

Template:Infobox House (TV series) episode

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete after replacing transclusions with {{Infobox television episode}}. RL0919 (talk) 17:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox House (TV series) episode (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

In the process of reformatting this infobox to use {{Infobox television episode}} as the backend, I noticed that it is basically redundant to the standard {{Infobox television episode}}. There is only one field not in the standard, which is the "final diagnosis" spoiler. The best article in the group, Pilot (House), is using the standard. I see no reason why the others should not follow this format. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Redundant. I never understood the necessity or importance to include the "final diagnosis". It seems to be an unnecessary spoiler that should be regulated to the plot section and not simply just sitting out in the open with no context. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as above. Sincerely, Jack Merridew 18:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant to {{Infobox television episode}} with no demonstrable added value for having its on special template. The "final disagnosis" is just an unnecessary, in-universe field. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:16, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Came here to oppose but that's an excellent reason. Before deleting someone should convert all of those templates. I can maybe help with that if necessary; tell me on my talk page if that'd be helpful. Shadowjams (talk) 06:11, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Also as above, That information should be contained on the article anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.198.68.33 (talk) 20:52, 21 June 2010 (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.

Template:ITC Productions Page Layout

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.

The result of the discussion was Move (without redirect) to Wikipedia:WikiProject_ITC_Productions/ITC_Productions_Page_Layout. Ruslik_Zero 18:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ITC Productions Page Layout (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not particularly useful as a template. I could see moving this to some WikiProject or userspace. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:54, 15 June 2010 (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.

user:Mohammad adil/infobox caliph

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.

The result of the discussion was Wrong venue. I went ahead and blanked the page per WP:User page#On_others'_user_pages, but if you want it totally deleted then WP:MFD is the place to go. RL0919 (talk) 15:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unedited for over a year: temporary sandbox for edits to the main template which is no longer needed. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't user space stuff go to WP:MFD? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:56, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't sure. Want it relisted? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably a good idea since the rationale used for deleting userspace stuff is a bit different. However, I don't feel that strongly about it (or the existence of this particular sandboxed template). Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:05, 15 June 2010 (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.

Template:·w

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.

The result of the discussion was Redirect {{·w}} to {{·wrap}}, as it was before. RL0919 (talk) 15:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:·w (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:·wrap (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Propose merging Template:·w with Template:·wrap.
Identical. Since it is widely used, it should just be turned into a redirect. Debresser (talk) 06:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like a misguided attempt to prematurely optimise by avoiding a redirect, as per Template talk:·w#Change to bypass Template middot-wrap. That editprotected request should have been denied. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why this proposal should be misguided, or look like anything other than what it is, I wouldn't know. The templates are almost identical, except for a minor detail which is not important to functionality, so they should be merged. Since both are heavily used, I propose a redirect. Debresser (talk) 14:41, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I said "that editprotected request", I am referring to the request which forked this template in the first place. I agree with the redirect. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Well, we seem to agree then. :) Debresser (talk) 22:43, 15 June 2010 (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.

Template:Cody Simpson

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete. RL0919 (talk) 14:58, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cody Simpson (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Delete as unnecessary. The template lists only two songs. Each song is already wikilinked from the short article. Provision of a template at this time is excessive and unwarranted. WWGB (talk) 03:07, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, compeletely unnecessary - the two songs don't even appear notable enough to have their own articles, much less needing template navigation. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:25, 15 June 2010 (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.

Template:Infobox Police Squad! episode

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete. RL0919 (talk) 14:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Police Squad! episode (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Redundant to {{Infobox television episode}} Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:48, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as redundant. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant to {{Infobox television episode}} with no demonstrable added value for having its on special template. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:16, 16 June 2010 (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.

Template:Infobox Jericho episode

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete after replacing existing transclusions with {{Infobox television episode}}. RL0919 (talk) 14:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Jericho episode (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is basically redundant to {{Infobox television episode}} with the exception of the addition of a morse code section. It's not clear why this is necessary to have in the infobox, however if it is of great importance, it could still be included using a different method. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this edit shows how it can be replaced with no loss of information, although I would suggest integrating the morse code part into the text if it is of any great importance. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wait! We could use Morse code on all infoboxes; and l33t, too. Or we could delete this as redundant. Can we haz new CSD criteria fo' such thingz? Ceers, Jack Merridew 04:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant to {{Infobox television episode}} with no demonstrable added value for having its on special template. Morse code?? *scratching head* -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:16, 16 June 2010 (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.

Template:Code Lyoko episode

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete. RL0919 (talk) 14:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Code Lyoko episode (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Basically orphaned and redundant to {{Infobox television episode}} Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as redundant. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as redundant orphan to {{Infobox television episode}} with no demonstrable added value for having its on special template. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:17, 16 June 2010 (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.

Template:Infobox fiction character

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.

The result of the discussion was Delete. RL0919 (talk) 14:38, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox fiction character (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Rarely used template which is redundant to the more widely used {{Infobox character}}. It hasn't been edited since 2008, and still has the old deprecated IMDB links, ... Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.RussianReversal (talk) 03:04, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as redundant. Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant. I also think we need to go back through the infobox character template and look at how many categories fail WP:WAF#Infoboxes, because there are quite a few still there (but that's another discussion). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 16:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - clearly redundant. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete redundant. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:17, 16 June 2010 (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.