Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 February 17

February 17

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 section.

The result of the discussion was delete Magioladitis (talk) 11:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hera Pheri (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM03:12, 18 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 12:18, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Iron Eagle Series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. (One is linked twice.) —Justin (koavf)TCM23:13, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete It's an exact copy of {{Pokiri and It`s Remades}}. Please renominate the other template if you want to. Magioladitis (talk) 13:02, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pokri (2006 film) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because the template is a highlighted arrangement of the related articles. While two articles are easily connected for navigation, I think three entails a more formal setup so one does not need to go through the article body to discover these relationships. Erik (talk) 15:44, 18 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 14:03, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Mexico Trilogy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because a set of three related articles is enough for a formal arrangement in a navigation template. This way, the related articles are more discoverable for purposes of navigation, as opposed to reading the prose of one topic for links to other topics. The template essentially highlights the relationships. Erik (talk) 19:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Helpful to navigate series.--TheMovieBuff (talk) 17:31, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. All 3 articles contain links to the other two movies. All 3 of these are also contained in the template for the works of Robert Rodriguez, which is present on all 3 articles. Essentially you have two templates in each of the 3 articles that give the same links.
  • Delete. Redundant to other templates that link the same articles. --RL0919 (talk) 21:02, 24 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 14:06, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dhoom (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete because film series article should not exist with just two films. It is more useful to consolidate information about three or more films as opposed to just two. I suggest merging anything useful from the film series article to either individual film's article. Erik (talk) 19:18, 18 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 14:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Wishmaster Series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:08, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because a set of four related articles is enough for a formal arrangement in a navigation template. This way, the related articles are more discoverable for purposes of navigation, as opposed to reading the prose of one topic for links to other topics. The template essentially highlights the relationships. Not sure how else four articles can be "easily navigable from one another" without sounding so forced in the prose. Erik (talk) 19:19, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Helpful to navigate series.--TheMovieBuff (talk) 17:31, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. After thinking it over, I believe there is little need for templates with just four links, where all four are articles about movies in the same series. Each article will have an {{Infobox film}} template containing "Followed by" and/or "Preceded by" links, so it is easy to follow the sequence. Plus, if someone views the Wishmaster 4 article, surely they will realize there is a Wishmaster and an Wishmaster 2, even if they aren't directly linked. Maybe there is some justification for series where the movies have totally different names, but not here. We should use navboxes for situations with more articles or less obvious relationships. --RL0919 (talk) 19:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per RL0919 as replaceable by "Preceded by" and "Followed by". The sequence is clear as it is numbered. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per RL and Plastikspork; template not necessary. Airplaneman talk 23:04, 27 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 13:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC) Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Waxwork Duology (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 13:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Terror Toons Duology (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates two articles, with a redlink. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:06, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:07, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Stepfather (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another; one is linked twice. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:06, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because a set of three related articles is enough for a formal arrangement in a navigation template. This way, the related articles are more discoverable for purposes of navigation, as opposed to reading the prose of one topic for links to other topics. The template essentially highlights the relationships. I disagree that the articles are "easily navigable"; for example, I don't see how one would get from the remake article to the original film's two sequels. The formal arrangement shows these relationships. Erik (talk) 19:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Four articles in a series that is clearly linked using the "Followed by" and "Preceded by" links in {{Infobox film}}. Slight variation from the norm in the fourth film being done as a remake, but still well linked without adding a navbox. --RL0919 (talk) 19:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete per RL0919 as replaceable by "Preceded by" and "Followed by". Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per RL and Plastikspork; template not necessary. Airplaneman talk 23:03, 27 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Critic's opinion can be added in the articles' body Magioladitis (talk) 14:00, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sadian trilogy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because the grouping seems historically significant enough for a formal arrangement; relationships between the films are not very discoverable in the prose itself. Erik (talk) 19:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. One critic called these three barely related films (same production company, but different subjects, directors, etc.) a "trilogy", and that becomes the basis of a navbox? Hardly seems a significant enough connection. --RL0919 (talk) 01:05, 25 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 11:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Maniac Cop Trilogy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. (One is linked twice.) —Justin (koavf)TCM23:04, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 14:52, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The House Tetralogy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. (One is linked twice.) —Justin (koavf)TCM23:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because a set of four related articles is enough for a formal arrangement in a navigation template. This way, the related articles are more discoverable for purposes of navigation, as opposed to reading the prose of one topic for links to other topics. The template essentially highlights the relationships. Erik (talk) 19:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. After thinking it over, I believe there is little need for templates with just four links, where all four are articles about movies in the same series. Each article will have an {{Infobox film}} template containing "Followed by" and/or "Preceded by" links, so it is easy to follow the sequence. Plus, if someone views the House IV article, surely they will realize there is a House II, even if they aren't directly linked. Maybe there is some justification for series where the movies have totally different names, but not here. We should use navboxes for situations with more articles or less obvious relationships. --RL0919 (talk) 19:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per RL0919 as replaceable by "Preceded by" and "Followed by". Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per RL and Plastikspork; template not necessary. Airplaneman talk 23:01, 27 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 12:14, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ginger Snaps (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. (One is linked twice and there is a redlink.) —Justin (koavf)TCM23:03, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 12:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:02, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 keep Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because a set of three related articles is enough for a formal arrangement in a navigation template. This way, the related articles are more discoverable for purposes of navigation, as opposed to reading the prose of one topic for links to other topics. The template essentially highlights the relationships. Erik (talk) 19:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Helpful to navigate series.--TheMovieBuff (talk) 17:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. Fewer links than I normally want from a navbox, but this is a franchise in multiple media, not just a film series, so the relationship among the articles is not as obvious as many of the other nominations on this discussion page. --RL0919 (talk) 20:01, 25 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 11:53, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Xtro Trilogy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:00, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 kept. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:08, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Species Films (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:59, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 kept. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:09, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cube film series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:59, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 12:06, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Virgil Tibbs trilogy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:57, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 12:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Three Colours (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:57, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 no consensus. Jafeluv (talk) 11:30, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Poison Ivy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:56, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 15:23, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Inspector Hornleigh trilogy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:56, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did anyone notice that the related articles don't have {{Infobox film}} yet? I think it has to deleted but I ll first create the infoboxes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:11, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake. There were so many similar nominations in a short amount of time that I must have missed checking this one before I commented. --RL0919 (talk) 13:46, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I added infoboxes everywhere and some links. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:23, 2 March 2010 (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.
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 delete aftr I added 3 items in {{Popeye}} Magioladitis (talk) 12:00, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Popeye Color Specials (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:55, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 Keep, although if there are four, it should renamed to something other than trilogy. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Look Who's Talking Trilogy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:52, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because a set of four related articles is enough for a formal arrangement in a navigation template. This way, the related articles are more discoverable for purposes of navigation, as opposed to reading the prose of one topic for links to other topics. The template essentially highlights the relationships. Erik (talk) 19:34, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Helpful to navigate series.--TheMovieBuff (talk) 17:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. Fewer links than I normally want from a navbox, but this is a franchise in multiple media, not just a film series, so the relationship among the articles is not as obvious as many of the other nominations on this discussion page. --RL0919 (talk) 20:04, 25 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 13:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Crocodile Dundee Trilogy (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:50, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 11:07, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Revenge of the Nerds (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:49, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 09:23, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Meet the Parents (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:45, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 09:26, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:K-9 series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:45, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 10:28, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The House Party Series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:45, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 18:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Harold & Kumar series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:44, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete because only two articles actually exist, and they are the ones for the two films. There is not a film series article nor a character(s) article. The two film articles can be interlinked without needing the formal arrangement of the navigation template. Erik (talk) 19:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not enough links to make a useful navbox, plus each of these articles has an {{Infobox film}} template on it with "Preceded by" and "Followed by" links to the other movie. --RL0919 (talk) 14:27, 25 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 16:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Big Momma's House (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:42, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 Keep. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Transporter series (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates four articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:42, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 delete Magioladitis (talk) 09:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Porkys (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Only navigates three articles, all of which are easily navigable from one another. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:41, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 Userfy per request Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 03:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Theotokos of St. Theodore (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused, doesn't seem to be much useful in its current state. Svick (talk) 02:29, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 Delete. RL0919 (talk) 04:56, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Prostitution in Europe (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not sure why this template was created in the first place, but has been superseded by use of "Europe topic" template. EeepEeep (talk) 02:17, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 deleted Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many ottersOne batOne hammer) 22:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WP AE goals (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not used or useful. Pcap ping 00:33, 17 February 2010 (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.
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 Userfy. Since Etincelles has already made a user-space copy, the template-space version will simply be deleted. RL0919 (talk) 19:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:The Vladimir Horowitz Barnstar (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards#Unecessary barnstar. Kayau Voting IS evil 10:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have now moved the barnstar to User:Etincelles/The Vladimir Horowitz Barnstar. Etincelles (talk) 10:50, 21 February 2010 (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.