Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 August 29

< August 28	August 30 >

August 29

Template:Football kit patterned arms

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:50, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Football kit patterned arms (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

outdated and replaced by {{football kit}}. 198.102.153.1 (talk) 23:58, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]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:Forbestopic

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:51, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

per Economist topic and others. 198.102.153.1 (talk) 23:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

in addition, it appears the template is broken due to redesign of Forbes website. 198.102.153.1 (talk) 00:08, 30 August 2012 (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:Food Battle

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 per author approval. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:43, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Food Battle (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

already well connected (why we need individual articles is another question). 198.102.153.1 (talk) 23:52, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TBH, I don't really get the point in the articles. I'll go AfD them if you want me to. Anyway, Delete. Zappa O Mati 23:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

currently none of them would pass AfD since they have no independent sources indicating notability. at the very least they should be merged into a single article, since that would increase the likelihood of notability (although it's not clear that even merging would help). 198.102.153.1 (talk) 23:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would have PROD'd or CSD'd them, but I ended up AfDing them instead at WP:Articles for deletion/Food Battles. (-_-') Zappa O Mati 00:08, 30 August 2012 (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:Climbing Grades

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:52, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Climbing Grades (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Hatnote previously used as a disclaimer that climbing grades were used in the article. Only used on two articles and I have since incorporated the link to climbing grades in a more useful context [1][2]. Template should be deleted in favour of contextualising the grades this way in future. SFB 19:27, 29 August 2012 (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:ArticlePreceding/Succeeding

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:52, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

These hatnotes were originally designed for the Ballet premieres series of articles. Purely chronological links are much better placed in infoboxes, text, or footers (such as Template:Ballet premieres - which I've created). If such a functionality were ever desirable, the much briefer Template:See also would still do the same job. SFB 19:15, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

delete, better in the infobox or the footer (e.g., {{sequence}}). Frietjes (talk) 19:27, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Together they have 22 transclusions in mainspace ballet pages, and one non-ballet. Those 22 are not even correct as a wp:hatnote, no misguided/searching user is helped with them.

replacements: Ballet pages: replace with {{sequence}} as suggested (below, not a hat), the non-ballet one a {{see also}}. Other transclusions are through hatnote documentation -- which will self solve by deletion. -DePiep (talk) 20:54, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I orphaned most of them since it seems like a clear case for delete. 198.102.153.1 (talk) 00:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I rv your documentation rm edit: TfD to be closed first. !voters here might want to see such things. -DePiep (talk) 09:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the one non-ballet one, History of Jardine, Matheson & Co., into see also. -DePiep (talk) 15:54, 6 September 2012 (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:Hour12nopad

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hour12nopad (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused and replaced by {{#expr:{{HOUR12|...}}}}. Frietjes (talk) 19:07, 29 August 2012 (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:MONTHAFTERNEXT

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

old and used (replaced by #time with "+2 months"). Frietjes (talk) 17:09, 29 August 2012 (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:NEXTDAY

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

Template:Tomorrow-month (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

old and unused (all redundant to variations of {{#time:j F|+1 day}} or {{#time:Y|+1 day}}. Frietjes (talk) 17:04, 29 August 2012 (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:NEXTWEEK

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

old and unused (all redundant to variations of {{#time:j F|+1 week}} or {{#time:Y|+1 week}}. Frietjes (talk) 16:25, 29 August 2012 (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:God's Work

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:13, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:God's Work (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

PoV; silly (unless, of course, OTRS have an email from God). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See also {{Gods Work/layout}}. Judging by the rest of the user's edits, it's not entirely clear whether this was intended as humourous or not. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 07:55, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
delete. god's copyright has expired ~5900 yrs (actual figure may vary) ago, now in Public Domain. -DePiep (talk) 08:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that means the universe did just fine for 13.7 billion years without God? Ego White Tray (talk) 03:54, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Remember, God only claims the copyright. Much like this. Anyway, any such claim now is expired. -DePiep (talk) 06:39, 31 August 2012 (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:Milo Greene

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:13, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Milo Greene (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A template created for a band with one single? Delete. SarahStierch (talk) 08:50, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Template covers only three extant articles, making it redundant.--Martin IIIa (talk) 00:12, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Too soon; very few links. WP:NENAN. Gongshow ^Talk 17:20, 4 September 2012 (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.

Portal footer templates

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 rename Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:15, 7 September 2012 (UTC) Propose renaming:[reply]

Template:PFSfooter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:Free software/Selected article/footer

Template:PSCOTfooter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:Scotland/Selected content/footer

Template:PZWfooter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:Zimbabwe/Featured content/footer

Template:PCANfooter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:Cannabis/Selected content/footer

Template:PIfooter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:India/Today's selected content/footer

Template:PITSAfooter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:India/Today's selected article/footer

Template:PITSAempty (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:India/Today's selected article/footer-empty

Template:PINPOTW (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:India/Picture of the week/footer

Template:PGoISAnnFooter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:Government of India/Selected anniversaries/footer

Template:PMTFfooter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:Musical Theatre/Selected content/footer

Template:PBfooter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) to Portal:Baseball/Selected content/footer

Rationale: These templates are only used in the Portal namespace, so they should have the "Portal" prefix, like other portal footer templates (e.g. Portal:Supreme Court of the United States/DYK/Layout/footer). DH85868993 (talk) 01:26, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I am ok with it. Please go ahead with renaming is this liase with portal's guidelines. Thanks, Shyam ^(T/C) 05:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - No objection in principle to the proposed renaming, provided that all the currently active transclusions are suitably updated. The Scotland Portal and associated archives, for example, have around 600 transclusions of {{PSCOTfooter}}. Given the substantial number of proposed renamings made here, the total number of transclusion updates for all portals must run into the high thousands. Who, or what (Bot presumably), will be doing this maintenance work? Good luck to the nominator if s/he volunteers. Without a clear and unambiguous answer to this question I cannot possibly support the proposal. --Cactus.man ✍ 19:43, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sporkbot updating everything is fine by me. --Cactus.man ✍ 19:43, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
support, so long as a bot will update all the transclusions (I'm sure SporkBot could do it, since that bot takes care of other TfD closure issues). Frietjes (talk) 20:27, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I was assuming a bot such as SporkBot would update the existing transclusions, per standard TfD practice. DH85868993 (talk) 01:10, 1 September 2012 (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.