Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 April 30

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< April 29 May 1 >

April 30[edit]

Template:Fb team Al-Masry[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 redirect the other template. Izkala (talk) 22:36, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is already a template for this club (Template:Fb team Al Masry). There is no use for this template. Ben5218 (talk) 20:43, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Wikipedia article is Al-Masry SC with a dash, and I think that'd be the better template to use. Regarding the other template, a redirect from Template:Fb team Al Masry to Template:Fb team Al-Masry could work. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:28, 30 April 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:RD medadvice[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; deleted as G7 by Foxj (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT⚡ 18:14, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This template has been formally deprecated since January 2011, and the wording is no longer consistent with WP:RD/G. It has been replaced by {{RD-deleted}}. Tevildo (talk) 19:48, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it's no longer serving a purpose, it seems fair to delete it. Thanks for letting me know Mattopaedia Say G'Day! 06:39, 1 May 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:Amsterdam Metro stations[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 keep. Izkala (talk) 12:25, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Amsterdam Metro stations with Template:Metro.
In a recent RM on Talk:Amstelveen Centrum metro station, it was agreed upon that stations served only by line 51 use the [[{{{1}}} tram stop|{{{1}}}]] format and that metro stations shared with NS railways use the [[{{{1}}} station|{{{1}}}]] format. All other stations use the [[{{{1}}} station|{{{1}}}]] format. This could be making the template obsolete? Or how should we deal with this? <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 18:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • It looks like some redirects may be needed, but otherwise Agree. Useddenim (talk) 20:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC) Keep. Required for {{S-line}}. Useddenim (talk) 21:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose Do you understand how this series of succession templates work together with s-line templates? Secondarywaltz (talk) 00:24, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 17:28, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; required for S-line succession templates. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 11:12, 2 May 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:Rotterdam Metro stations[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 keep. Izkala (talk) 12:25, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Propose merging Template:Rotterdam Metro stations with Template:Metro.
As with the Amsterdam Metro station template below, the articles have been moved to new names as per the RM at Talk:Kralingse Zoom metro station. Now all of the metro-only stations use [[{{{1}}} station|{{{1}}}]], while those shared with NS railways use [[{{{1}}} station|{{{1}}}]]. In both cases, a merger with the metro template would be ideal. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 18:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • It looks like some redirects may be needed, but otherwise Agree. Useddenim (talk) 20:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC) Keep. Required for {{S-line}}. Useddenim (talk) 21:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose Do you understand how this series of succession templates works? Templates Rotterdam Metro lines, stations and color, (with the same prefix) work together with s-line templates and are looking for a matching name. Your article renaming now requires you to distinguish between metro stations and tram stops, and any other names that don't fit the default in that stations template. This is not what the Template:Metro does. 00:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 17:28, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; required for S-line succession templates. Jc86035 (talk • contribs) Use {{re|Jc86035}} to reply to me 11:12, 2 May 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:Puf[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 redirect to {{ffd}}. (non-admin closure) ~ RobTalk 03:17, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As WP:PUF is now closed, this template can either be marked {{historical}} or redirected to {{ffd}} (for the benefit of people who may still accidentally use this template due to muscle memory or the like) Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:49, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno: No, my mistake. Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 10:16, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per nom, redirect to {{ffd}}. --Izno (talk) 02:41, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirecting to {{ffd}} seems to be the least confusing solution. However, since {{puf}} and {{ffd}} do not have exactly the same parameters, it's maybe better to change the wikicode to {{ffd|1={{{1|}}}|log={{{log|{{#time:Y F j|{{{date|}}}}}}}}. This should ensure that the template also works with {{puf}}'s date parameter, which is missing from the {{ffd}} template. --Stefan2 (talk) 23:50, 5 May 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:Not English/dated[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. Izkala (talk) 21:08, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not used except on user and user talk pages. The changes to Template:Not English by Rayukk were reverted by Jac16888. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:13, 30 April 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:Infobox Indian politician & Businessman[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. Izkala (talk) 12:27, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessarily stores article content (reference/categories/stub template) in a template. ~ RobTalk 03:48, 30 April 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_April_30&oldid=1138533188"