Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 October 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< October 12 October 14 >

October 13[edit]

Template:Gastrointestinal surgery[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).

The result of the discussion was Relist at Oct 28. Primefac (talk) 21:30, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Gastrointestinal surgery with Template:Digestive system procedures.
Duplicate scope, no need for two separate templates. Tom (LT) (talk) 23:39, 13 October 2015 (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:Plxtod[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).

The result of the discussion was delete all. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 06:56, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

undocumented and basically unused. 198.102.153.1 (talk) 21:13, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete undocumented mess turning Wikipedia into a private wiki -- the creator is unresponsive -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 04:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added {{nsxz}} Frietjes (talk) 16:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete these were only being used in a set of templates that have already been deleted. As with those templates, these are the result of one user thinking they can make their life easier without thought for the rest of us trying to figure out what the hell is going on. Primefac (talk) 16:27, 14 October 2015 (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:Stretch-[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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 06:56, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

unused duplicate of {{val}}. 198.102.153.1 (talk) 21:07, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete duplication -- turning Wikipedia into a private Wiki by making personal versions of common uses to make articles uneditable -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 04:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete - per nom. It's unused and overly complicated. Primefac (talk) 16:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's not actually a duplicate of {{val}}. {{val}} obeys WP:MOSNUM, this one doesn't. (It looks more like something that someone might create if they don't know about {{val}}.) That said, that's a good reason in its own right to delete. --ais523 22:20, 14 October 2015 (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).

Template:Celmap[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).

The result of the discussion was delete all. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 07:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

only used in one article and no documentation. can be substituted and deleted. 198.102.153.1 (talk) 21:03, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - DO NOT SUBST repetition of mapping already contained in various other templates , undiscussed and generally unwanted by the concerned editors at the wikiproject. This undocumented massive mess turns Wikipedia into a private Wiki that only one editor can ever maintain and that creator is unresponsive -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 04:12, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added {{cepro}} and {{conp}}. Frietjes (talk) 14:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete As with all of these other templates by Chermundy, it's convoluted and impossible to parse out without detailed knowledge of how it's done. Primefac (talk) 14:38, 14 October 2015 (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:Empire Award for Best Supporting Actress[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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 07:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation Rob Sinden (talk) 15:03, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The award has had only one recipient, and it is pointless to have a navbox for a set of one. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:01, 16 October 2015 (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:Empire Award for Best Supporting Actor[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).

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) BethNaught (talk) 07:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough links to provide useful navigation Rob Sinden (talk) 14:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The award has had only one recipient, and it is pointless to have a navbox for a set of one. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:01, 16 October 2015 (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:Is-old[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).

The result of the discussion was Delete. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 21:27, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This tag was intended as a pragmatic response to concerns raised about no-source tags on pre 1923 images amongst others.

It was expected that the category this puts image to was temporary, but as the category continues to grow, this template is not achieving the aim it was intended for.

This template should be deleted, and the tagged images tagged appropriately for being inadequately sourced.

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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2015_October_13&oldid=687980471"