Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 March 26

< March 25	March 27 >

March 26

Template:Slavic Orthodox Christianity

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).

The result of the discussion was relisted here. ~ Rob^Talk 13:55, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Slavic Orthodox Christianity (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

There is no such thing as "Slavic Orthodox Christianity". That article does not exist and the template it made up of various Eastern Orthodox concepts. Very confusing. Zoupan 18:18, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I got the idea to create this template from some of the articles about the Russian slavophiles and articles like this one Slavic Orthodox. I did not create this article nor the term nor the other releated articles. So I wonder if the above editor can find a source that says there is no such thing as Slavic Orthodox? Since there is of course Slavic Christianity and Slavic neopaganism, Slavic Muslims and sources that use the term Slavic Orthodox [1], [2], [3]. LoveMonkey (talk) 14:42, 28 March 2016 (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).

DJ Ritendra 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob^Talk 13:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:DJ Ritendra (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:DJ Ritendra singles (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Articles on artist and most of his works were deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Invisible Love. --Finngall ^talk 17:27, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no viable wikilinks present anymore. ~Mable (chat) 17:34, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:37, 26 March 2016 (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).

Template:Clocker (Transformers)

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob^Talk 13:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Clocker (Transformers) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template masquerading as an article about a non-notable fictional character. No point moving it to the mainspace as it'll just end up being deleted sooner or later as yet more Transformers fancruft. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clocker (Transformers). Josh Milburn (talk) 14:36, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What in the world? Delete, as no notability is shown. ~Mable (chat) 15:13, 26 March 2016 (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).

Template:Hassan Rana

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).

The result of the discussion was keep. ~ Rob^Talk 13:53, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hassan Rana (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not notable. Only one film is released out of three. Musa Talk 18:31, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because TFD isn't very concerned about notability. That's for AFD to decide. However, a navbox is for navigation between related articles. This one links 4 articles, total. Some may consider that too few. (I don't, necessarily.) The chances of this template being deleted would increase if the articles were deleted, first, but I don't see any such proposal. —PC-XT+ 03:26, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Rob^Talk 14:05, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, four articles related to one another is perfectly fair for a navbox. Rana has a big role in these films and the "categorization" makes perfect sense. If one or two of the articles gets deleted, we're in a different situation. ~Mable (chat) 15:11, 26 March 2016 (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).

Template:IMFACT

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob^Talk 13:47, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Too few links to justify a navigation template. Random86 (talk) 08:35, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the band is covered by the Star Empire Entertainment template. This adds nothing. ~Mable (chat) 08:41, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No substantive entries. Redundant, unnecessary, and unwarranted. Softlavender (talk) 07:49, 29 March 2016 (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).

Template:Dilbert books

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).

The result of the discussion was delete. ~ Rob^Talk 13:46, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dilbert books (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

generally redundant (in terms of working navigation links) to {{Dilbert}}. Frietjes (talk) 00:36, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I merged some links from this template into the Dilbert template mentioned above, and that works fine. This template adds nothing, and we'd do better with a "List of Dilbert publications" article. Delete. ~Mable (chat) 00:39, 26 March 2016 (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).