Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 October 22

< October 21	October 23 >

October 22

Template:PD-art-georgia

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 --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 12:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-art-georgia (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Deprecated, {{pd-art}} can take parameters now. ViperSnake151 20:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Template:Pd-art. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 01:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but as far as I can tell, the parameter call would be {{PD-art|PD-art-georgia}}, which means we still need the template. Can you elaborate on what parameter makes this obsolete? Pagra shtak 00:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's redundant to our usual {{PD-old-70}}, where {{pd-art|pd-old-70}} can easily be called. ViperSnake151 01:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep PD-art-georgia and PD-old-70 are very different. I don't see how this is deprecated at all. Pagra shtak 13:44, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But then again, Template:PD-Georgia redirects to {{PD-old-70}} on Commons, so its assumed by that setup that Georgia uses 70 years P.M.A. like a whole lot of other countries. ViperSnake151 19:51, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The way it is now, it looks like PD-art-georgia can be used for images that are in the public domain in Georgia, but whose creator died less than 70 years ago. PD-old-70 does not apply in that case. Is there an alternative for that situation? Pagra shtak 20:04, 3 November 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:The Fakes

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. Garion96 (talk) 21:09, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Fakes (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not enough content for a template, just an album and two probably non-notable EPs. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:06, 22 October 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:Jingguang Stations

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 Garion96 (talk) 21:11, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Jingguang Stations (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

See this. Another unused template full of redlinks. Enigma ^message 15:56, 22 October 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:Editorial cartoon reference

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. Garion96 (talk) 20:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editorial cartoon reference (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Used in only one article. Each call there has an url and would be better served by {{Cite web}}, which has better formatting. {{Cite comic}} may also be a possible substitute, as the url parameter was recently added. Pagra shtak 14:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed {{Comic strip reference}} as another possibility. Pagra shtak 15:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - seems redundant to the various templates mentioned by the nominator, all of which allow for more information than this does. Terraxos (talk) 22:26, 5 November 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:FF class

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 --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 11:01, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:FF class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

It occurs only once. It also seems to be not that useful in the article which is transcluded. Magioladitis (talk) 12:50, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I was going to submit this myself—you beat me to it! I agree that it is unneeded in the only article that uses it. Pagra shtak 15:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Redundant, no real purpose. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:57, 23 October 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:Snack Foods

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 speedy delete under G7: author requested deletion. ~ L'Aquatique[talk] 00:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Snack Foods (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A very vague and random list masquerading as a template. No rules of inclusion. Really any snack food could be included. Pointless. Woohookitty^Woohoo! 04:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's interesting to see what people have put on it; it's ridiculously diverse. This, that and the other _[talk] 09:35, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
DELETE. ItsLassieTime (talk) 13:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, possible speedy G7 since the template's only significant contributor suggests deletion above. We already have a List of snack foods and several list of regional snacks articles; an analogous "List of United States snack foods" article would be a more useful way to present this kind of broadly defined yet regionally specific content. --Muchness (talk) 18:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
G7 author requested deletion, trivial template. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:48, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment at this point its getting the articles it's in listed at WP:CSD. I should know how to fix this, but I don;t. DGG (talk) 00:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Not an issue anymore as the tag's been removed, but I suspect putting the tag between <noinclude> and </noinclude> would work. --Muchness (talk) 00:25, 23 October 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:Pittsburgh Penguins seasons

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 Maxim_(talk) 21:12, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pittsburgh Penguins seasons (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

The content of this template has been merged into Template:Pittsburgh Penguins, it is redundant to keep both. Black ngold29 03:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, and switch the templates in each season article. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 04:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Most seasons already include both, so no switching should be required. Black ngold29 04:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As a matter of personal opinion, I've never liked merges of this sort. Puts too much into the main template that is marginally relevant to the other links. That said, it is redundant, so delete. Reso lute 05:06, 22 October 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.