Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 January 15
| < January 14 | January 16 > |
|---|
January 15
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 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
- Template:Major English-language business magazines (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Currently the only non-obvious inclusion criterion is that the magazine is actively publishing. There are hundreds of such magazines—see Category:Business magazines. I do not believe there are any objective criteria by which a useful and manageably small selection of these could be made. Psychonaut (talk) 23:22, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
- delete, better covered by a category. Frietjes (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 03:07, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete I don't see how any reasonably objective criteria could be developed to define inclusion in this template. As remarked above, the cat does the same job better. --Randykitty (talk) 12:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
- 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 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
I really do not see the use of this template, since we already have Template:Miss Philippines winners in the Grand Slam pageants, Template:Miss Philippines-Earth titleholders, Template:Major International Pageants titleholders 2013, and Template:Miss Earth 2013 delegates. The template takes the winners of two competitions, whose only commonality is that they happen to be run by the same company. This is surely an example of WP:TEMPLATECREEP. StAnselm (talk) 02:38, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- delete duplicates the other navboxes. Frietjes (talk) 23:30, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- 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.