April 28, 2006

edit
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 page.

The result of the debate was speedy deleted by User:Doc glasgow. Circeus 23:15, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Unamerican (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User Against Americanisation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:User Not Unamerican (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
These userbox templates could be considered offensive and exist in some cases solely to show anti-American sentiment. It could also be considered offensive that these boxes use an upside down United States Flag. I also see no other such boxes for other countries. Perhaps a better alternative, such as to the "against Americanisation" box would be to be for allowing nations to maintain their individual cultures. —Aiden 23:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't these userboxes get deleted a long time ago? I thought I remembered them from somewhere.... Homestarmy 03:41, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete and delete any future un- and anti- boxes degrading ANY nation or its flag. These are divisive and inflammatory to the extreme, and is meant to be. WP is not a soapbox. Keep political bias out of this project, please. Nhprman 16:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep. Bullshit, there is absolutely nothing offensive about them. --Dragon695 21:36, 29 April 2006 (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 page.
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 page.

The result of the debate was Keep. — xaosflux Talk 14:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ancient Greece topics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Another large collection of links; an indiscriminate collection of data. Septentrionalis 22:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep, it's for navigational purposes, not data collection. While at the moment it is not heavily used. it most certainly can be, and provided it makes it through this TfD, I'll ensure it is. PoptartKing 23:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - I shall declare I have a vested interest in the template as I created it. I am aware of its failings as I listed on the talk page. It is however, not an indiscriminate collection of links (see the Ancient Egypt template, my inspiration for this one). --Knucmo2 23:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, is used in this case for navigational purposes as stated by PopartKing above. This template can be improved. --Andy123(talk) 00:29, 29 April 2006 (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 page.
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 page.

The result of the debate was delete Circeus 21:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Epochs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This template is unencyclopedic and nonsensical, POV towards some kind of New Age mysticism, and it also contains a copyrighted image. I suggest deleting it. Lovelac7 19:26, 28 April 2006 (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 page.
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 page.

The result of the debate was delete Circeus 21:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Star-planetbox primary (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:Star-planetbox secondary (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:Star-planetbox end (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This template sequence for providing extrasolar planetary system information has poor semantics: the first planet in the list is handled differently to all subsequent planets, which could be confusing for editors and makes maintenance of the list more difficult (e.g. if a planet is to be inserted before the first one in the list). The table markup in this case is more concise and simpler to use than these templates, so I suggest subst:ing the instances in articles, then removing this template sequence. Chaos syndrome 14:09, 28 April 2006 (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 page.
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 page.

The result of the debate was all deleted, no userpages broken. --Cyde Weys 06:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Babel-48 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
There was a previous TfD for all of the fixed size Babel boxes, but it was withdrawn due improper formatting and concerns about users from other language Wikipedias being unable to copy their language boxes here. Despite those issues the TfD was trending delete until it was closed. This new TfD only applies to Babel-21 through Babel-48... all of which are used on fewer than ten pages each, less than fifty pages in total, and for the majority of them no pages at all. All of these can be replaced with {{userboxtop}} and {{userboxbottom}}, {{Babel-N}}, or {{Babel-X}} to provide the same functionality. This TfD does not include Babel-1 through Babel-20 because they are in more common use and might theoretically be needed for other language 'transplants'. Note that I also changed Babel-16 through Babel-20 into redirects to Babel-X as a test case... theoretically all of the smaller Babel boxes could be changed to do so, but I am not advocating that currently. CBDunkerson 11:31, 28 April 2006 (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 page.
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 page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Cyde Weys 19:07, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Olde (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Useless and silly, not used on any pages. Night Gyr 04:38, 28 April 2006 (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 page.