Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 September 1

< August 31	September 2 >

September 1

Template:Jimmey Eat World

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 page.

The result of the debate was delete. // Pilotguy (Have your say) 20:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelled "in progress" template redundant to {{Jimmy eat world}}, which has been completed. Already orphaned. Unint 20:13, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Michael 22:05, 2 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:Sleater Kinney)

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 page.

The result of the debate was delete // Pilotguy (Have your say) 20:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelled template redundant to {{Sleater-Kinney}}. Already orphaned. Unint 20:13, 1 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:RapidTransitProject

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 page.

The result of the debate was delete // Pilotguy (Have your say) 20:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't realize I could use the parent WikiProject template -- Selmo ^(talk) 19:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think its nice to see projects with their own template thingy. Perhaps slight rewording but then again... btw, mention this on the WP:Trains talk. 19:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC). Changing vote to Delete. Per nom and clutter.Simply south 10:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The person proposing was also the creator. He now realizes that the parent project, WikiProject trains, has such a template. So this one is redundant. Marc Shepherd 12:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. If the project would rather use the parent template, that's up to them. Kirill Lokshin 16:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Michael 22:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. —Khoikhoi 04:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Since the author and only editor of the template requests deletion, it falls under CSD general criteria 7.--TBCTaLk?!? 19:36, 7 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:Crystal Palace F.C. Centenary XI

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 page.

The result of the debate was delete // Pilotguy (Have your say) 20:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As before, the one AC Milan 2003 Wiinging squad, Ranger Centenary XI were deleted. Matt86hk talk 01:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There isn't even an article discussing the choices. It's more of an award than a proper team. sʟυмɢυм • т • c 19:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Off topic My prediction is correct, some resevre squad Template created. It should put it to tfd also. Matt86hk talk 01:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is actually similar is style to Template:Reading F.C. best-ever XI, which has not been deleted. User:ChristalPalace 11:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about Template:1970 Chelsea F.C. squad as well? sʟυмɢυм • т • c 14:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Believe all these templates should be deleted Dodge 10:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. – Elisson • Talk 00:02, 9 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:PD-StarTrekRank

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 page.

The result of the debate was delete // Pilotguy (Have your say) 20:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This template claims that Paramount Pictures has willingly released Star Trek Rank insignia designs to the public domain, but offers no proof of this. Pagra shtak 17:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete, blatantly, dangerously wrong. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 03:03, 9 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:Njt-sta

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 page.

The result of the debate was keep // Pilotguy (Have your say) 20:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This template was listed for deletion here. It was closed as delete, even though there were only keep votes and comments. No one seems to be willing to delete the template, given that, so I'm relisting it for clarity. No vote from me. Pagra shtak 15:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – To briefly summarize my arguments in the previous debate: this template enables the creation of standard, correct links to various train stations in the New Jersey/New York metropolitan region. The template does not "violate" any of the reasons for having a template; it also doesn't fit into any of the conditions under WP:CSD#Templates and What (and what not) to propose for deletion at TfD—lensovet –talk – 23:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I also participated in the previous debate, and am surprised that this question has come up again. As Lensovet says, this template vastly simplifies the process of linking to various train stations (not merely New Jersey Transit stations) in the region and also the use of various linking boxes. Some time ago, someone used substitution to replace this template with multiple pipings wherever it appeared. As a result the NJT line template became well-nigh unreadable, uninterpretable, and thus unusable. One of the cardinal rules of program code--and that is exactly what templates and infoboxes are, is program code--is to make sure that its use is simple enough so that persons other than the inventors of that code can easily use it without error. Without this template, other templates that currently depend upon it would violate that principle.--Temlakos 20:24, 3 September 2006 (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 page.

Template:Titled-click

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 page.

The result of the debate was keep as nomination was improperly listed. // Pilotguy (Have your say) 20:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Click now can add titles.--4.143.210.82 01:14, 1 September 2006 (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 page.