Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 April 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 1

[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 Relisted on 2017 April 9 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:11, 9 April 2017 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) – Train2104 (t • c) 14:30, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if this should be filled or what but it's an empty template and has been empty for 2-3 months, Serves no purpose at present, Thanks –Davey2010Talk 15:45, 1 April 2017 (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).
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. (If anyone wants to renominate (after 1st April) I have no objections.). –Davey2010Talk 15:59, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too many Fools/April around, and bad title too! :) Oh well, that was quite fun and intense, but game's up too. Don't forget to send the contents back too. Wait up, isn't it already there in history? NoNews! 15:26, 1 April 2017 (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).
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 Relisted on 2017 April 9 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:11, 9 April 2017 (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).
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 Relisted on 2017 April 9 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:10, 9 April 2017 (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).
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 relisted on 2017 April 9. Primefac (talk) 00:12, 9 April 2017 (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).
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. Primefac (talk) 03:14, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LULZ is not a valid "keep" reason. [April Fools!] Mr. Guye (talk) 03:13, 1 April 2017 (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).
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. Primefac (talk) 03:14, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too much pranking going on. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 02:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. This is not funny. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 02:36, 1 April 2017 (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).
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. Primefac (talk) 03:14, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Insert joke about "Alternative facts" here.[citation needed] Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 01:43, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep. No. Just no. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 01:58, 1 April 2017 (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).
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. Primefac (talk) 03:14, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too many jokes flying around today. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 01:43, 1 April 2017 (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).
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 Relisted on 2017 April 9 Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:10, 9 April 2017 (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).
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. (non-admin closure) – Train2104 (t • c) 14:31, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Two links... fails WP:EXISTING. Corkythehornetfan (ping me) 00:42, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's nice to see that TFD is being serious. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 01:15, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not enough links....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:13, 2 April 2017 (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).