Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 May 15

< Wikipedia:Templates for deletion | Log
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2006 May 15)
< May 14 May 16 >

May 15, 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 delete Circeus 00:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Msp

edit

Template:Msp (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Only purpose is to provide an external link to a site that is so utterly and profoundly advertising-heavy as to make one want to scream "PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY MAKE THE GOOGLE ADS STOP." FCYTravis 23:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Note our policy on external links, which states that links should not be included if they (2) contain only information which should be in the article anyway, and (5) contain objectionable amounts of advertising. On one sample spoiler page, I counted 15 distinct ads. That's objectionable in my book. (ESkog)(Talk) 23:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. These webpages are very informative about the plot of a film, they tend to be accurate and are usually much more detailed than the plot sections in the articles. The link is also useful for checking the content of the plot section, and for expanding it (though for this purpose it is preferable to also see the movie, of course). See also Wikipedia:External_links#What_should_be_linked_to: Sites that contain neutral and accurate material not already in the article.The advertisements do not make reading the text inconvenient: they are not blinking or overlapping the text, or anything like that.--Patrick 23:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete See policy on external links as per ESkog. I expect Patrick has popup blocking software, because it's unreadable under the popups. ... Had these links not been added by an obviously well intentioned editor (Patrick), they would have gone into the SBL when I first saw the template. I'm confused that anyone would argue to keep this site. Most of the plot summaries are horribly written. I was reading the mi3 article, hit the link... groaned out "spam" ... and was in the process of scanning the external links table in the database to find out where else it was spammed when I noticed it was being added by a template. --Gmaxwell 00:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Gmaxwell. Mackensen (talk) 00:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, absolute rubbish site. Linking to this is doing a disservice to our readers. --Cyde Weys 00:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, kill it with fire. The only external link we need on film pages is to imdb, and possibly the official site. - FrancisTyers 00:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, garbage. Not informative—it only includes stuff which should be in the article anyway—not to mention that the summaries themselves are horribly written—Linking to them will only encourage people to not write decent ones. That combined with the insane ammount of advertising it has, means it should never, ever be linked from any article, and especially not via a template.--Sean Black (talk) 00:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, unnecessary advertising template. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 02:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above American Patriot 1776 02:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete A user at one of the film articles I work on recently found it to be covered in ads, along with a heap of mistakes (characters names wrong etc) - apparently they are not peer reviewed. Anyway, the point is, it is not needed. Cvene64 04:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Template that produces inappropriate external links is twice as inappropriate Fnarf999 14:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Delete though I never thought I'd agree with Cyde. — Nathan (Got something to say? Say it.) 00:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- this isn't who external links should be done --T-rex 05:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- editors can use this site to make a better plot summary in the article, but it doesn't retain any relevance as an external link—i.e. it doesnt add anything that can't be done in a Wikipedia article. Of course, this begs the question of if the site has more thourogh plot summaries that we generally reach by consensus, but to me this is outweighed by the massive amount of advertising on the site and the fact that their summaries are often of a low quality, often even wrong. savidan(talk) (e@) 04:11, 18 May 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 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User RSN

edit

Template:User RSN (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Only used by one user and redundant with Template:User MLB-RedSox. SCHZMO ✍ 21:14, 15 May 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 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Can school

edit

Template:Infobox Can school (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Created in February, 2006, this template has never been edited and does not have a non-"subst" link to it. Two alternate templates that are currently used are {{Infobox Canadian School}} and {{Infobox Education in Canada}} Usgnus 20:17, 15 May 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 Speedied - linkspam. --Doc ask? 20:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User RebelForums

edit

Template:User RebelForums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Userbox for a non-notable forum that has less than 150 members. SCHZMO ✍ 19:55, 15 May 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 speedily deleted by Petros471. — TKD::Talk 22:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Comic Book Issue

edit

Template:Comic Book Issue (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Don't need it anymore. Created a better template. Kmcneil 17:02, 15 May 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 Deleted --Cyde Weys 22:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Shinty-stub

edit

Template:Shinty-stub (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Created by an unregistered user. Appeared in article Ardnamurchan Camanachd to replace Template:Gaelic-sport-stub. Not needed and nowhere near Wikipedia's standards Saga City 11:59, 15 May 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 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:14+ & Template:Canada-PG

edit

I found this on PROD, and I thought it could use a debate, so I changed the process. PROD reason was "Unused and uses fair use image" by User:Someguy0830 today May 15. 70.51.10.35 05:22, 15 May 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 Deleted --Cyde Weys 09:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User 3e

edit

Template:User 3e (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The complete text of this template is "This user has had 3 edits". It's not even in a userbox - it's just plain text. It would seem to be of rather limited use. BigDT 00:51, 15 May 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 No consensus but it is kind of moot as it was deleted by Tony Sidaway. Kotepho 10:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User AAK

edit

Template:User AAK (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Political Userbox which contains a redlink, implying that no one actually cares about this organization. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • After deletion and Subst'ing, they will reside on User pages, where, if people want to cut/paste the code to their User pages, that's up to them. As for useless/not useless, that's fine with boxes like these that are obvious, but will be fought tooth and nail for "useful" boxes. Few user boxes are useful enough to be editing tools, and that's what template space is for. - Nhprman 18:19, 15 May 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 no onsensus, default to keep Circeus 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User College Confidential

edit

Template:User College Confidential (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Again, a redlink Userbox. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User KingKong

edit

Template:User KingKong (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Broken code, image removed and ignored. I can only assume this is unused from it's lack of maintenance. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 Deleted --Cyde Weys 09:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Tony Sidaway/User

edit

Template:User Tony Sidaway/User (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This template redirects to an editor's talk page. I can't imagine this template being of widespread usefulness. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 no consensus, default to keep Circeus 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Wic

edit

Template:User Wic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
A vandal's brag. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User activity

edit

Template:User activity (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Questionable usefulness. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 uncertain consensus, being WP:BOLD and deleting this unused box Circeus 01:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User admin2

edit

Template:User admin2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
A poorly coded "userbox," I assume this was made by a vandal. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 Circeus 01:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User adminstandards

edit

Template:User adminstandards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Ahoy, trolling! Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 speedy keep the content. As comments overwhelmingly addressed the content of the box rather the status which it occupies, I'm closing this as a subst the content and delete the actual template. No actual content is lost in the process, and the removal of said code to a user's page places it beyond the bailiwick of TfD and CSD. Mackensen (talk) 19:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this closure is in violation of the very purpose of TFD. This template should be undeleted immediately. --70.218.30.181 04:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User blogger

edit

Template:User blogger (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Another broken box, which I can again only assume it is unused. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and protect from deletion'. Extremely-well used. Not only taht, but we have two users, User:Cyde and User:Conrad Devonshire. I have sent messages to them to stop the rampant nominations immediately. I will take this to arbitration if necessary.   User:Raccoon Fox - Talk   18:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
<The above comment has been refactored to remove personal attacks.> // [admin] Pathoschild (talk/map) 20:04, 15 May 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.

Umm... RE: above. This isn't a content for deletion page, its a template for deletion page. the consensus was to keep the template... that being said, this was only listed for about 10 hrs. and should not have been closed yet. I'd like the closing admin to relist and let TFD run its course, then not ignore the consensus. Mike McGregor (Can) 11:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed I've had the same concern with other userbox TfD's being closed out very rapidly, primarily involving one admin who has made fast work of his own & others' TfDs.--Ssbohio 02:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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 Circeus 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User blz-4

edit

What it looked like before blanking

blz-4 This user is a near native speaker of blazon.




Template:User blz-4 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This userbox is evidently, "Not applicable." Fake User 09:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete, not an encyclopedic template. --Cyde Weys 09:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep Seems to refer to the ability to understand the jargon associated with harldry. I fail to see how thats not relivent to an encylopedia. (which raises concerns about cyde's votes. It seemes he's just voting "Subst and delete, not an encyclopedic template." to every userbox on this page without bothering to evaluate them... perhaps his votes on this page should be discounted by the closing admin...) Mike McGregor (Can) 12:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy? Delete - please note that the picture of the box above is NOT what it actually looks like - that was the original box, which was quickly blanked. For most of the box's life, it has been blanked and really could probably be speedied as housekeeping or something with little effort to do anything else with it. BigDT 15:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Move to the User space, where it can be SAFE from deletion attempts, and is not in Template space. Nhprman 18:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge' with box below, which should be kept. Septentrionalis 00:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and Delete --Terence Ong 07:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep Heraldry, as a concept, is important to diverse areas of study such as genealogy, history, political science, & vexillology. This userbox is encyclopedic on its face. It would be up to those arguing against it to make the case that despite its bearing on the creation of this encyclopedia, it should still be removed. Also, I oppose, prima facie, deletion of userboxes one by one while consensus is lacking on the larger issue. These kind of userboxes do no harm and, by and large, are opposed with the intent to artificially limit the behavior of Wikipedians. That they are in template space is an issue of system architecture; they are not used in article space. The controversy needs to be put to bed once & for all, not endlessly played out here.--Ssbohio 02:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Nobody includes, not even the creator. --StuffOfInterest 18:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all in-policy UBX. If you want to edit that policy to reflect your concerns, please do so. TfD is not the right place to create or subvert policy. John Reid 14:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I will put it on my page now, if it's a little inaccurate (I'd say I'm more like blz-3), but that's not important. And it IS encyclopedic; it could, theoretically at the very least, help find people who understand the complex jargon of heraldry. Lockesdonkey 20:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - one userbox for the blazon ability should be enough. // Liftarn 11:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reformat to make sense: nobody speaks blazon natively. Ardric47 19:54, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Claim of expertise. (and, yes, Mackensen, this means keep as template.) Septentrionalis 02:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but change wording; "near native" seems odd.--Runcorn 18:29, 27 May 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 No consensus, kept Circeus 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User blz-N

edit

looked like this before blanking:

blz-N This user is a native speaker of blazon.




Template:User blz-N (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This userbox is evidently, "Not applicable." Fake User 09:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete, not an encyclopedic template. --Cyde Weys 09:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep Seems to refer to the ability to understand the jargon associated with harldry. I fail to see how thats not relivent to an encylopedia. (which raises concerns about cyde's votes. It seemes he's just voting "Subst and delete, not an encyclopedic template." to every userbox on this page without bothering to evaluate them... perhaps his votes on this page should be discounted by the closing admin...) Mike McGregor (Can) 12:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete - just as the above box, this one was blanked not long after being created. Nobody uses it and it has been blank for most of its life with only one attempt to unblank. Speedy as housekeeping or something. BigDT 15:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Move to the User space, where it can be used on User pages. Nhprman 18:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep In addition to the general grounds why this sort of thing should be discouraged (above), this a claim of special knowledge, the primary purpose of userpages. It should be kept as a transclusion; it is useful to know who has it, and it is not the mark of a faction (both sides in the Style Wars will claim it.) Septentrionalis 00:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and Delete. --Terence Ong 08:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - one userbox for the blazon ability should be enough. But it's handy to have someone who can decode heraldic descriptions. Just think of all the coat of arms and such. // Liftarn 13:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep Heraldry, as a concept, is important to diverse areas of study such as genealogy, history, political science, & vexillology. This userbox is encyclopedic on its face. It would be up to those arguing against it to make the case that despite its bearing on the creation of this encyclopedia, it should still be removed. Also, I oppose, prima facie, deletion of userboxes one by one while consensus is lacking on the larger issue. These kind of userboxes do no harm and, by and large, are opposed with the intent to artificially limit the behavior of Wikipedians. That they are in template space is an issue of system architecture; they are not used in article space. The controversy needs to be put to bed once & for all, not endlessly played out here.--Ssbohio 03:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No inclusions. --StuffOfInterest 18:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all in-policy UBX. If you want to edit that policy to reflect your concerns, please do so. TfD is not the right place to create or subvert policy. John Reid 14:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to Template:User blz-5 since nobody speaks blazon natively. Ardric47 19:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect per Ardric47.--Runcorn 18:28, 27 May 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 No consensus, kept (but been WP:BOLD and reformatted) Circeus 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User br wikipedian

edit

Template:User br wikipedian (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This userbox doesn't conform to the accepted dimensions and is unused. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete, not an encyclopedic template. --Cyde Weys 09:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Large and ugly but this is no crime. Friendly Neighbour 11:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Template:User_Brazil.--M@rēino 14:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: As the creator of the template, I will not vote on this, but I will say that, although I don't particularly mind if it's deleted, it also doesn't seem to cause any harm by being there (granted, it's unused). Also, it is as [un]encyclopedic as any other template that ids a user by nationality ("this user if from country"). About any particular problem with size, colors, etc, anyone can be bold and fix it, I believe. Redux 15:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete - if it isn't being used and the creator doesn't mind its deletion, speedy delete it. Redux, thank you for your contribution and please don't be scared off by the user box wars - you are, of course, always welcome to display this logo on your own page or to create an actual userbox (similar to Template:User_Brazil, but with the colors and text you are looking for). The only reason it is (probably) going to be deleted is that it isn't particularly useful as a template. BigDT 15:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Move to the User space, where it can be SAFE from deletion attempts like this in the future. Nhprman 18:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but clean up. The Gerg 01:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and delete big and nasty, not for template American Patriot 1776 02:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep, harmless; you want to delete it because it's the wrong size? Wow... --Rory096 19:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. No reason to delete beyond nominator's dislike for it. JohnnyBGood   t c 17:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep In this case, it's hard to see harm in a Wikipedian's country of origin. THat said, the userbox is a mess & should be cleaned up. Overall, I oppose, prima facie, deletion of userboxes one by one while consensus is lacking on the larger issue. These kind of userboxes do no harm and, by and large, are opposed with the intent to artificially limit the behavior of Wikipedians. That they are in template space is an issue of system architecture; they are not used in article space. The controversy needs to be put to bed once & for all, not endlessly played out here.--Ssbohio 03:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and <div style="float: left; border: solid #6ef7a7 1px; margin: 1px;">{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #c5fcdc;"| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: #6ef7a7; text-align: center; font-size:14pt;"| [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|45 px]]="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em;" | This user is a [[Wikipedia|Wikipedian]] in [[Brazil]]! (And loving it!|}</div>reformat. Now, now, FakeUser, it may not be a violation of NPOV, but just because you don't like it isn't a very valid reason for deletion!
  • Userfy -- Does not conform to UBX policy. John Reid 14:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and make smaller.--Runcorn 18:25, 27 May 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 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User en-3.5

edit

Template:User en-3.5 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This looks like an unused attempt at humor. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User independent Bethnahrin

edit

Template:User independent Bethnahrin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
A userbox of displaying a controversial political stance. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Subst and delete, not an encyclopedic template. --Cyde Weys 09:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and delete per nom American Patriot 1776 13:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as these Syraic userboxes are very useful to protect the Syraic-themed articles, which are constantly at risk for POV edits. --M@rēino 14:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Move to the User space, where it can be SAFE from deletion attempts like this in the future. Nhprman 18:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, declaring a POV is good to maintain NPOV in articles. --Rory096 19:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As has been said before, we are born into this world naked, screaming, & wet... & (I assert) having a POV. If a controversial political stance were all it took, then the article on Taiwan could fall in the same category, as its existence as a seperate entity is a controversial issue. Having an identified POV can only help the editing process when compared with a hidden POV. Also, I oppose, prima facie, deletion of userboxes one by one while consensus is lacking on the larger issue. These kind of userboxes do no harm and, by and large, are opposed with the intent to artificially limit the behavior of Wikipedians. That they are in template space is an issue of system architecture; they are not used in article space. The controversy needs to be put to bed once & for all, not endlessly played out here.--Ssbohio 03:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and delete. Only used by one user. --StuffOfInterest 18:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all in-policy UBX. If you want to edit that policy to reflect your concerns, please do so. TfD is not the right place to create or subvert policy. What? Are only noncontroversial political stances acceptable? Pfooie. John Reid 14:10, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst and Delete as controversial. Ardric47 19:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is useful as showing where an editor stands; it is not likely to be controversial among most editors.--Runcorn 18:22, 27 May 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 no consensus, kept Circeus 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User remember Andrew

edit

Template:User remember Andrew (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This userbox is unused. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User rfa-2

edit

Template:User rfa-2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Is anyone using this? It seems like a weak troll, or a ploy for sympathy. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Unless they are tools for helping us edit the encyclopedia, these templates ARE guilty of being in the wrong place. Moving it to user space saves them from deletions. Let's do it and move on. Nhprman 18:10, 15 May 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 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User rfa-3

edit

Template:User rfa-3 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Again, how is this helpful? Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User shirley

edit

Template:User shirley (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
An unmaintained attempt at humor. Probably unused, since no attempt was made to fix it after a fair-use image was removed. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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 No consensus, kept (but been WP:BOLD and reformatted) Circeus 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User uk wikipedian

edit

Template:User uk wikipedian (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This userbox doesn't conform to the accepted dimensions and is unused. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, do me a favor and point out one (just one!), I went through the list of refrenced userpages at the relevant image Image:Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg, and none of them had it. Fake User 17:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty obvious really - just click on "links" above - or just go here. Looks like a good 40 or so at first glance... including mine. DJR (Talk) 17:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. Thank you. Fake User 17:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

11:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

If it's being used, and it can be fixed, is this nom still effective?--Ssbohio 02:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, David. The problem with a "keep" here is that most template may be deleted soon. By "Substituting" the text (ref. to by "Subst") and moving it to User space, you get to keep the box, and ensure that no one can ever delete it again. Consider supporting "Delete and Move" to user space, or "Delete and Subst" and see WP:MACK for the proposal to save Userboxes from future deletions. Thanks! Nhprman 15:01, 16 May 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 no consensus, kept Circeus 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User zodiac:Aquarius-3

edit

Template:User zodiac:Aquarius-3 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
A joke? Wikipedia has nothing on a programming language called Aquarius. Fake User 09:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know for a fact that this is a joke? I was just trying to assume good faith on what actually looks like a mistake of some kind. Fake User 17:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
you implied it was a joke in your nomination as a reason to delete. Mike McGregor (Can) 19:44, 15 May 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 no consensus, kept Circeus 20:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User zodiac:Aquarius-N

edit

Template:User zodiac:Aquarius-N (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Perhaps a joke, which I am out of the loop for? Fake User 09:21, 15 May 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_May_15&oldid=1088036637"