December 16
[
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
per nom
Martijn Hoekstra
(
talk
) 10:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Template:Cropped image
?(
talk
·
history
·
transclusions
·
logs
·
subpages
)
unnecessary frontend for
Template:CSS image crop
.
Frietjes
(
talk
) 23:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Delete
, identical in function and only 3 remaining transclusions.
??Preceding
unsigned
comment added by
WOFall
(
talk
?
contribs
) 00:41, 17 December 2014 (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
per nom
Martijn Hoekstra
(
talk
) 10:31, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Template:TCACycle WP78 cropped
?(
talk
·
history
·
transclusions
·
logs
·
subpages
)
unused and broken.
Frietjes
(
talk
) 21:59, 16 December 2014 (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
as failing to provide it's primary purpose: a navigational aide
Martijn Hoekstra
(
talk
) 10:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Template:WBCBL Teams
?(
talk
·
history
·
transclusions
·
logs
·
subpages
)
The navigational template contains one blue link,
Women's Blue Chip Basketball League
, which is the only article the template is located in. The template simply creates a list of the basketball teams in the league, thus going against
WP:TG
, and could better be expressed in a list or table in the league's article.
Aspects
(
talk
) 21:46, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Delete
- Navboxes exist to navigate among linked articles. We often debate whether some red links are acceptable -- in this case they are NO blue links for presently existing articles. This navbox serves no purpose that a list of teams withing the articles would no serve better.
Dirtlawyer1
(
talk
) 16:28, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Keep
- Would keeping the navbox encourage others to add team articles?
TheScottDL
(
talk
) 22:17, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Delete
as per nom. First write articles, then create template. --
P?1?9?9
?
17:42, 5 January 2015 (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
as redundant
Martijn Hoekstra
(
talk
) 10:35, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Template:Years in the State of Palestine
?(
talk
·
history
·
transclusions
·
logs
·
subpages
)
all redirects.
Frietjes
(
talk
) 20:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Keep
- refers to the post-2012 entity, formerly referred as "Palestinian Authority". State of Palestine is the UN designation, regardless whether it is recognized and by how many nations and it does function as a semi-state.
GreyShark
(
dibra
) 16:04, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- then why is it entirely redirects?
Frietjes
(
talk
) 23:32, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Because someone moved all relevant Year in the State of Palestine articles to Year in the Palestinian territories, with no discussion.
GreyShark
(
dibra
) 12:13, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- delete
- redundant to
Template:Years in the Palestinian territories
. If necessary, that template can be changed to split its contents between the two designations, following appropriate discussion. --
NSH002
(
talk
) 19:58, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Delete
It just duplicates
Template:Years in the Palestinian territories
.
Jackninja5
(
talk
) 06:01, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- delete
as redundant to
Template:Years in the Palestinian territories
. Adding the official designation in this templates header would be sufficient. --
P?1?9?9
?
17:44, 5 January 2015 (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
per nom
Martijn Hoekstra
(
talk
) 23:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Template:Hoak Media
?(
talk
·
history
·
transclusions
·
logs
·
subpages
)
After the sale of KNHL (formerly KHAS-TV) was done, Hoak now only owns KAUZ (and sale of KAUZ is pending), made this template unnecessary.
John123521
(
Talk
-
Contib.
)
RA
13:41, 16 December 2014 (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
per nom
Martijn Hoekstra
(
talk
) 22:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Template:Flashlink
?(
talk
·
history
·
transclusions
·
logs
·
subpages
)
It has only 19 use cases and its use is unnecessary as per
WP:EL#Rich media
.
Rezonansowy
(
talk
|
contribs
)
09:33, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Conceptually, i want to agree, but is the need for the template truly gone?
WP:EL#Rich media
seems to point toward specifying when an external link requires a proprietary plug-in. Ideally, as some subjective percentage of modern browser adoption meant most were able to view such content without plug-ins, the template would no longer be warranted. Would deletion just roll any uses back to the basic external link template?
Cander0000
(
talk
) 21:39, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
Relisted
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Plastikspork
―Œ
(talk)
06:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Delete
. The correct style seems to be (
Adobe Flash Player
) rather than
Requires Adobe Flash Player
, and it's just as easy to write that as it is to write the template name. And the direct method can work for any plugin, not just those that have a template. I'd reconsider if we wanted to put in an icon or something, but it's easy to re-recreate the template if need be. --
Beland
(
talk
) 22:27, 17 December 2014 (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.