Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 August 11

< August 10	August 12 >

August 11

Template:Son Goku family

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. RL0919 (talk) 01:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Son Goku family (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphaned template. —Farix (t | c) 17:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Farix's reasoning. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:36, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:18, 12 August 2010 (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.

Template:Kosovo and Metohija

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. JPG-GR (talk) 21:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kosovo and Metohija (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template; redundant to generic Template:Infobox Former subdivision which is being used at Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija (1990–1999) Green Giant (talk) 06:01, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - There is ongoing discussion on Kosovo talk page about split that may use this infobox. --Tadija^speaks 15:15, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where exactly is it being discussed, because I looked at Talk:Kosovo and I don't see any mention of this template. Anyway, whatever is decided there, you still don't need a hardcoded template like this. Far better to use something like {{Infobox country}} or {{Infobox former subdivision}} and put it in the article itself. Green Giant (talk) 15:00, 19 August 2010 (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.

Template:Kosovo (geopolitical region)

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. Unused and no objections to deletion. RL0919 (talk) 01:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kosovo (geopolitical region) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template; redundant to Template:Republic of Kosovo Green Giant (talk) 05:58, 11 August 2010 (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.

Template:TL Operators

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. RL0919 (talk) 01:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TL Operators (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template. d'oh! _talk 05:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unused. Redundant to the following more comprehensive templates:
- {{Navbox TransLink (SEQ) bus network}}
- {{Navbox TransLink (SEQ) train network}}
- {{Navbox TransLink (SEQ) ferry network}}

Airplaneman ✈ 16:37, 16 August 2010 (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.

Template:Expand-inline

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. JPG-GR (talk) 21:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

This seems to be serving the same purpose as {{Clarify}}. It's not really asking for expansion so much as it is elaboration — what few uses it had were more suited for {{clarify}} instead, or not suited for anything at all. What's more, we already have {{expand-section}}. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 04:00, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Agree, it's not just a tiny version of {{Expand section}} and its brethren. {{clarify}} is perfectly adequate as far as I can see. Si Trew (talk) 12:49, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It can also be used to request more evidence in support of a proposition, whereas {{clarify}} is more for cases where you do not understand what is being said. Only reason this is not a “keep” vote is because the template is broken. Bwrs (talk) 15:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that what {{citation needed}} is for? Si Trew (talk) 05:27, 17 August 2010 (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.

Template:Rosters within Milwaukee Brewers organization

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. JPG-GR (talk) 21:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rosters within Milwaukee Brewers organization (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template isn't employed on any page and doesn't serve any purpose, as Milwaukee Brewers minor league players contains all of these templates. Muboshgu (talk) 02:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It is used on Template:Nashville Sounds roster, Template:Huntsville Stars roster, Template:Brevard County Manatees roster, Template:Wisconsin Timber Rattlers roster, Template:Helena Brewers roster, Template:Arizona League Brewers roster, and Template:DSL Brewers roster. It is used for quick navigation between team roster templates when updating the rosters of the Milwaukee Brewers organization. NatureBoyMD (talk) 02:48, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and categorize into Category:Roster templates or something like that. Si Trew (talk)

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.

Template:Rosters within Houston Astros organization

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. JPG-GR (talk) 21:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rosters within Houston Astros organization (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template is only on one page, and that page contains the templates this page contains. It doesn't improve navigation. Muboshgu (talk) 02:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and categorize as for Template:Rosters within Milwaukee Brewers organization. It's used on all the template pages it references, as far as I can see. Si Trew (talk) 12:55, 11 August 2010 (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.

Template:Rosters within Cleveland Indians organization

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. JPG-GR (talk) 21:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rosters within Cleveland Indians organization (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template isn't employed on any page and doesn't serve any purpose, as Cleveland Indians minor league players contains all of these templates. Muboshgu (talk) 02:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and categorize as for Template:Rosters within Milwaukee Brewers organization. Si Trew (talk) 12:55, 11 August 2010 (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.

Template:Statistics (stat. mech.)

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. Unused and no objections to deletion. RL0919 (talk) 01:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Statistics (stat. mech.) (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template has been replaced everywhere by Template:Statistical mechanics. They were both used, but the other one is more sophisticated. Dhollm (talk) 08:00, 11 August 2010 (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.

Template:Statistical mechanical ensembles

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) 15:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Statistical mechanical ensembles (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template has been replaced everywhere by Template:Statistical mechanics. They were both used, but the other one is more sophisticated. Dhollm (talk) 08:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as orphaned and superseded. Airplaneman ✈ 03:13, 13 August 2010 (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.