Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 February 23

< February 22	February 24 >

February 23, 2006

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 KEEP. -Splash^talk 01:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User en-me-1

Template:User en-me-1 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
The template seems orphaned at all other levels; also, the parent language template does not exist. I think this template should be therefore be deleted as well. -- Avi 21:01, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Abstain as unused and as apparent nonsense. – Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 21:09, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Changing vote based on explanation of what it is from Angr below. – Doug Bell ^{talk•contrib} 02:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete yea, this one's a head scratcher... no objections here.Mike McGregor (Can) 04:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ - Fine by me unless someone actually wants to use it.--God of War 20:38, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay now this makes a lot more sense. Keep--God of War 19:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as I read this language and use it in my courses at University. I have it on my userbox page. JustinLillich 05:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Would you mind telling us what language that is exactly? Pagra shtak 14:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Middle English. Angr/talk 15:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete absolutely useless --Emc² (CONTACT ME) 17:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This template can be used to show an understanding of English written in the Middle Ages in such works as The Canterbury Tales. BrianGCrawfordMA 23:59, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as Middle English; now the "me" part makes sense. -- Jjjsixsix ^(talk)/_(contribs) @ 03:44, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Describes a skill or area of expertise which could be useful in writing of the encyclopedia. Zocky | picture popups 09:40, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but Move to Template:User me-1. I see no reason to make this a "subclass" of English if even AmE (American English) is separated. —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 23:45, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Move to Template:User me-1 (good idea, Cuiviénen!). —Traal 06:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The ISO code is enm, old English is ang. Omniplex 19:37, 2 March 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. -Splash^talk 01:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-NaziGov

Template:PD-NaziGov (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This template was created by a disruptive user, most likely as an attempt to be inflammatory. According to a discussion at Template talk:PD-Germany, it is also inaccurate. - EurekaLott 06:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, inaccurate. JYolkowski // talk 02:38, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Chairman S. | Talk 07:09, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but same caveat as for Template:GermanGov: TfD is not the right venue to settle legal issues. In this cases, the template has hardly any use at all, and its deletion won't cause much of a problem. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 07:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --Emc² (CONTACT ME) 17:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, created by an anti-Semitic vandal - see [1] and edit summary on [2]. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 01:30, 28 February 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 KEEP. -Splash^talk 01:25, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Olympic Winter Games Host Cities

Template:Olympic Winter Games Host Cities (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This template is redundant with the list already on the Winter Olympic Games page, and with Category:Host cities of the Winter Olympic Games. It also performs a task which is better covered by {{Olympic Games}}, which links the actual articles on the individual games rather than the cities where the games took place. See also Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 February 22#Template:Olympic Summer Games Host Cities below. Flower party■ 00:12, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replace with Category or List, then Delete - My argument on the Summer Games Host Cities template applies equally to this one. Michael Ralston 01:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as {{Olympic Games}} is a better template to use. --Ter e nc e Ong 14:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems like a good template --CFIF (talk to me) 00:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This template courd be usefall and keep for historikal.**My Cat inn @

(talk)** 03:36, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I like this method better than the list used on the Summer Olympics page. It presents the city data in an way that is eaiser to view and digest rather than that straight list. --Kunzite 22:37, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Easy to see the host cities on any Olympic Page where the template is placed, without having to look at the main Winter Olympic Page. - Nick C 20:40, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per above. Chairman S. | Talk 01:10, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, and fix {{Olympic_Games}}. I suggest that we definitely delete this template and the other one as mentioned in the deletion summary, as they are redundant to the other template. I do suggest, however, that if it is possible, that we make it so that whenever someone mouses over a date on the {{Olympic Games}} template, it displays the name of the city and the year in that little yellow box that comes up. (i.e. If date is 2004, box will say Athens 2004. I think this will really work. --Jared ^[T]/_[+] 12:43, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete !!! --Emc² (Contact me ) 16:59, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and put only on host cities pages, not on Olympic pages. -- Jjjsixsix ^(talk)/_(contribs) @ 03:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Nick C - Hektor 11:37, 28 February 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 speedy deleted. JYolkowski // talk 03:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ExpandIP

Speedy delete, if it's just you that's edited it. Flower party■ 00:28, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's just me. | Klaw ¡digame! 01:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Speedied. JYolkowski // talk 03:39, 23 February 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.