Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 July 7

< Wikipedia:Templates for deletion | Log
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2006 July 7)
< July 6 July 8 >

July 7, 2006

edit

Template:Horta

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 delete -- Drini 06:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Horta (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The template has been replaced by Template:Parishes of Horta, which is named and formatted like the remaining Portuguese "parishes by municipality" templates. Mário 17:30, 7 July 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.

Template:X-Files seasons

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 delete -- Drini 06:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Postmortem note: I've restored and relisted the template fora few more days -- Drini 15:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Template:X-Files seasons (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

All 9 seasons have been merged into one article without objections. Therefore, this template serves no purpose. See Talk:List_of_The_X-Files_episodes Will2k 17:00, 7 July 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.

Template:MilitaryAirfield frame Template:MilitaryAirfield data Template:MilitaryAirfield title et al

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 delete -- Drini 06:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MilitaryAirfield frame (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:MilitaryAirfield data (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:MilitaryAirfield title (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:MilitaryAirfield runway title (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:MilitaryAirfield image (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:MilitaryAirfield runway (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This appears to have only been used in Tiksi Airport (since replaced with airport infobox) and the creator has not edited since November 2005. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:20, 7 July 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.

Template:Interstate 95/Florida exit list

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 speedily deleted by Jaranda (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves). — TKD::Talk 16:23, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is being used to transclude a large table into I-95 exit list and Interstate 95 in Florida. According to Wikipedia:Template namespace, "Templates should not masquerade as article content in the main article namespace; instead, place the text directly into the article." This is being used solely as a template to transclude article content, when simply placing it in Interstate 95 in Florida and linking there on I-95 exit list will do the same thing. --SPUI (T - C) 10:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Long tables like this are best kept separately, they can make other parts of the article nearly uneditable otherwise. - Kookykman|(t)e 15:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. This isn't in the template namespace, the header above was made using a piped link. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 16:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. I only piped the title so the link in the TFD template jumps here. --SPUI (T - C) 18:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know some odd-sounding seagulls that would be mighty offended by that comment.
In all seriousness though, no, it's not a template, if for no other reason than because it's not in the template namespace. The reason you cited applies only to the Template namespace, that's why it's called Wikipedia:Template namespace. This is straight article transclusion, as discussed on Talk:I-95 exit list, and which as far as I can tell, you supported at the time. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 18:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I never supported it. If you want me to take it to VFD, I'm sure it will be deleted as a transcluded-only page. --SPUI (T - C) 18:20, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"I had always been told that content should not be transcluded in this way, but personally I see no problem with this. I might play around with the placement of the edit link." - Northenglish (talk) -- 18:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but please userfy. --Domthedude001 17:44, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd prefer not to, as it's article content in the article namespace. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 18:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per G7. The transclusion is no longer necessary, and I-95 exit list is now a redirect. That being said, I'm confused as to why this wasn't speedily kept since it's not actually a template. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 02:37, 8 July 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.

Template:MLB HoF

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 Supermajority Keep --William Allen Simpson 01:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:MLB HoF (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This template is used to add an unattractive picture in random locations in articles. There is a perfectly good Category:Baseball Hall of Fame, and notifying readers that someone belongs to a group that is too large to be listed in or on the article is job of categories, not templates. If this is keepable, why not have a similar template for every category? Then some people could have thirty small unattractive pictures scattered randomly around their article! Not a good idea. Chicheley 03:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, when I commented it was the logo. I have to agree that if the logo is indeed not fair use for such a template, it should probably be deleted. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 19:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; again note that the previous move for deletion [1] failed. As for complaints about the "ugly picture", it's being used because the HoF logo was deemed unacceptable under fair use despite official OK (see Ender78 comment above; and Ender should know, if they're who I think they are). Perhaps the location on each page should be standard (near the top), but otherwise no problem. Putting it near the bottom would really just duplicate the presence of the category. Since many of the articles for members are rather extensive, it's a good way to have notation both at the top and bottom. MisfitToys 19:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep as per Seidenstud — Michael J 03:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - How about the following design... ~ trialsanderrors 06:55, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
 
Player X
is a member of
the Baseball
Hall of Fame
  • Comment - Player mugshots aren't always easy to come by, especially with players from earlier in the 20th century. Also, it visually does not correlate to the Baseball Hall of Fame, so as a visual aid it's sort of pointless. I heavily discourage using any image other than one signifying the HoF. --Mike Tigas 08:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I am not so sure that the new proposed logo is meant to have the mugshot of each player whose article uses the template. My interpretation was that the antique-looking tobacco card photo of Honus Wagner, one of the original inductees into the HoF, would simply serve as an iconic symbol for all HoF players. -Seidenstud 12:41, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I don't like this either, but it's slightly better. Then you just get confused people saying "Is that what that player looks like?" and "Why is there a picture of some guy on my page?" --Liface 03:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep as everyone else. -- GWO
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_7&oldid=1138690658"