Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 August 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 3

[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 page.

The result of the debate was delete --Pilotguy (roger that) 20:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2000 Summer Olympics medal count (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Template is redundant with a section of 2000 Summer Olympics, which would be its only use. Jonel | Speak 23:41, 3 August 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.
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 (roger that) 20:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User simple-5 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Impossible. There is no such thing as professional Simple English. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 22:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete In addition, it's only a line of text. —Mira 01:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Neil916 07:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)Rename and keep or delete per Zoz, below, and clarify what "Simple English" is (it currently links to a disambiguation page). Neil916 15:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I have fixed the userbox. Writing at a professional level in "simple English" is no different than writing at a professional language in regular English. It means that you know the syntax, the grammar, the vocabulary, etc, very well and can (or do) create "simple English" works on a professional basis. It has nothing to do with whether or not English is your first language. BigDT 14:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Better While it's good that you fixed the ubx itself, I still have no idea who ever or how one could "create 'simple English' works on a professional basis." Do you mean children's book authors? This is especially difficult as Wikipedia has not defined what simple English is. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 22:13, 5 August 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.
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 (roger that) 20:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User simple (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Unnecessary. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 22:34, 3 August 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.
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. —Misza13 T C 15:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User left Wikipedia for good (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Unnecessary. Why April 25? Of what year? Delete.-Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 22:33, 3 August 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.
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. Robdurbar 17:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hotels in Serbia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Even though I guess it was created in good fate but how many hotels are there in Serbia? Imagine filling this template with a thousand hotels or even more. I think we should delete it. Avala 16:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep At the moment, 6 notable enough to be in Wikipedia with categorised articles. There's no reason to delete this at present; if it becomes bloated, it can be split. --ais523 11:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Sorry, but split into what? I don`t see any sustainable reason to keep this template as it's oversize is not a question. Tomorrow we will have a template with one thousand Serbian hotels and it will be purposeless. We can always make List of hotels in Serbia but using a template for this is ridiculous. And no matter how hard I try I can`t find any similar template. Avala 11:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Split by geographic region (for instance, Category:Hotels in Belgrade is a bluelink). Not all hotels (whether serbian or not) are likely to be notable enough to have Wikipedia articles. This does seem to be the first hotel-related navbox, however. Going by precedent, I'm starting to think that this would be better of as a cat, so I'm changing my vote. --ais523 12:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Although I disagree with the nominator (I don't think overlength will be a problem), it seems that navboxes are rarely used for buildings by geographic reason. Also, categories will handle this better (and already exist), so I've changed my vote. --ais523 12:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete This template is useful template, but hotel in serbia is not only two of three, many hotels in each countries. Therefore, This should be deleted. *~Daniel~* 06:41, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. per ais523. —dima /sb.tk/ 16:32, 8 August 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.
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 per creator's request. —Misza13 T C 15:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Medlineplus (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This template was created and used only for a single page, and was subsequently blanked in December of 2005 after it was found to fail WP guidlines. Delete - no longer used, fails guidelines. NoahElhardt 22:23, 3 August 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.
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 speedy delete G7 by User:Fang Aili. --ais523 11:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:User Single Female (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

soft redirect for a Germanized userbox, is not linked from anywhere, changed back in early June. Delete. -- nae'blis 15:18, 3 August 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 section.