Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 June 1

< May 31	June 2 >

June 1

Template:Life in Brazil

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 debate was Delete Happy‑melon 19:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Initially created to be a brazilian version of Template:Life in the United States, but there aren't enouth important pages (like Educational attainment in Brazil, Household income in Brazil, Homeownership in Brazil and others) to make it really necessary. Actually is not only a template with a lot of red links, but a redundant and poor version of Template:Brazil topics — Guilherme ^(t/c) 22:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant to {{Brazil topics}}. If more of these articles existed, there might be a need for such a sub-template, but at the moment it just seems unnecessary. Terraxos (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2008 (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:WikiProjectU2TV

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 debate was Delete Happy‑melon 19:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned template, never used on any other page. –Dream out loud (talk) 03:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as orphaned and not associated with any WikiProjects. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 17:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as userboxes in template namespace should begin with Template:User _____, if the user wanted to creat a userbox, he should have place it under a subpage of his userpage. DA PIE EATER (talk) 00:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I created the template and related wikiproject but since deleted it Highfields (talk) (contribs) 15:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unused. Creator is ok with deletion as well.--Lenticel ^(talk) 00:36, 3 June 2008 (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:Visual3D.NET/to do

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 debate was Delete Happy‑melon 19:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Visual3D.NET/to do (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Claims to be a template but is actually a user's to do list for an article that has since been deleted as blatant advertising . LegoTech·(t)·(c) 00:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should be speedily deleted. Renata (talk) 08:10, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as useless, speedily if possible. Terraxos (talk) 00:12, 7 June 2008 (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:Canadian Idol winners

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 debate was Delete Happy‑melon 19:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to Template:Canadian Idol. Euroleague (talk) 00:54, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's redundant to {{Canadian Idol}} and it's not used on any pages. I'm wondering, though, if it might be useful by itself when that huge template isn't wanted. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 17:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unused and redundant to {{Canadian Idol}} --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:24, 3 June 2008 (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 largest cities

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 debate was keep, or at least 'redesign'. The template should be renamed ("Infobox" is not correct) and it may need some more work, but certainly no consensus to delete. Happy‑melon 19:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is very redundant and unnecessary to have a template in a template page that was specifiably made for this reason. — Nuclear Vacuum 20:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is just that? If this is the problem, we will start using this code directly in the articles, you help me? Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 20:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Resolved problem Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 20:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Uh? I thought WP:AUM was dead a few years ago... Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 02:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not a useful template and seeks to standardise another template with no consensus on standardisation. ^┌_Joshii^┐_└^chat_┘ 01:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete - In addition to non-standardisation this template can have issues. When recently used at Template:Largest cities of Australia,[1] it resulted in the table looking lopsided. The version used by all of the other city specific templates listed at Category:Templates of city populations allows for more flexibility[2] and is not subject to the same problem seen with this template when populated with the same information. Comparison The template would therefore seem to be of little value. It's use is apparently being pushed by a single editor. --AussieLegend (talk) 01:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The numerous templates (Largest cities of...) contains a code created by me a year ago, [3] and improved a few months ago, [4] when the User:NuclearVacuum created several templates and added on several articles. [5] [6] [7] [8] Also there was no discussion to set the standardisation. Felipe C.S ^{( talk )} 15:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
hm, why is this on TfD? If the template has issues, don't use it. Maybe it just isn't ready to go live yet. Maybe it can be turned into something useful, and if not, it will just sit there and gather dust for some time. I see no reason to solve this by a deletion debate. dab (𒁳) 16:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This seems to be more an issue about design and/or authorship. --the Dúnadan 20:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Jza84 | Talk 00:58, 5 June 2008 (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.