Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 September 13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 13

[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. 28bytes (talk) 07:29, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Affliction Events (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This mixed martial arts promotion only held two events (the third was cancelled at the last minute). The events are notable themselves, but there is no reason for them to be in their own template. The promotion is defunct and there are no plans for future events. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 19:38, 13 September 2011 (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 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) 14:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cruiser class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

old, unused infobox template, replaced by other templates. Frietjes (talk) 16:06, 13 September 2011 (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 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) 14:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Croydon Labour Profile (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

old, orphaned labour statistics box, which is not used by Croydon. Even if it were used, we don't need a separate special template to hold the information. Frietjes (talk) 16:02, 13 September 2011 (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 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) 14:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cross River Tram start (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

old, orphaned succession box for a cancelled tram. Frietjes (talk) 15:57, 13 September 2011 (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 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) 14:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Scref (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
Template:Scnote (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Currently used in 29 articles. Reuse of the same scref results in duplicate HTML ids and invalid HTML. For example, List of recipients of the Silver Buffalo Award currently has 740 validation errors. Can be replaced by standard footnote markup. See the history of Agnes Hewes for an example. -— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 15:16, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added. I was double checking use, since scnote was using cnote in some instances. There are other variants that I will be working soon.---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 13:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
{{Listref}} does not create backlinks; see the doc page for examples. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 12:54, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm happy to see these pages migrate to use the new {{listref}} (which Gadget's very helpfully enriched, so that now it seems to offer editors essentially the same functionality as scref), and delete per nom. Dsp13 (talk) 16:43, 15 September 2011 (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 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 Keep. 28bytes (talk) 07:16, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Weasel-inline (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

As said about peacock terms: "You see a 'peacock term', you fix it. The template just disfigures the article, is feature creep, and its existence is in conflict with our vaunted principle of 'so fix it'." Same principle applies here for weasel words. Let's encourage people to fix it - not just tag stuff. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:22, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm actually keener on keeping this than on yesterday's series of inline nominations. With weasel words it's not always obvious who the some[weasel words] that the text refers to are, and it may be non-trivial to fix that (because rewording to elide the words "some say" may inappropriately represent opinion as fact, while it may be quite a bit of work nailing down the source). Quite different from "this is an external link, please delete it or turn it into a reference", like {{external links-inline}}, where the fix is semi-mechanical. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 07:21, 13 September 2011 (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 section.