Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 April 27

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. Angr (t • c) 11:40, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Japan infobox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:Japan infobox is a single-article infobox that is not needed in Wikipedia. Delete.--Brendenhull (talk – edits) | 20:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, If every article had it's own infobox... Wikipedia would need a huge cleanup. But they don't, and this template shouldnt be anymore special than all the other ones. --Dominic 04:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per Dominic. ILovEPlankton 00:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete it is also not used on the main Japan page.--Andrew c 02:34, 29 April 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 redirected to {{cleanup}}. Angr (t • c) 11:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Clean up (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Redundant to {{Cleanup-date}} 165.189.91.148 15:19, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and to {{Cleanup}} - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 15:32, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and tag as deprecated (with {{Tdeprecated}}?); the likelihood of this being re-created by a well-meaning citizen is relatively high I think. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and Replace all the articles that have this template with {{Cleanup-date}}. --Dominic 04:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and replace Per dominic. ILovEPlankton 00:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Too much process. I'm just going to be bold and redirect to {{Cleanup}}. Mangojuice^talk 22:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Done. I had to remove the TFD notice to do it. If anyone objects, they can put it back but I really don't see the point in the debate. Mangojuice^talk 22:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep of course. This is what is most commonly put on the article itself by an editor, then Pearle changes it to cleanup-date for sorting. --Rory096 04:45, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just realized that it wasn't always a redirect to cleanup; I thought {{cleanup}} was on TfD! --Rory096 04:47, 4 May 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 merge and delete. Angr (t • c) 11:22, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NY-bt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Redundant to {{NYC Bridge}}. Latter is younger, but is prettier and is being used. NY-bt is unwieldy, is only being used on two articles, which are not bridges/tunnels, but rather related organizations. They can go without a template, I think. Delete.- CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 06:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 13:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and Delete. {{NYC Bridge}} is prettier, and has a less-confusing name, but including the operators is important. Migrate them from {{NY-bt}} to a third row in {{NYC Bridge}}, then delete the redundant template. --CComMack 23:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to and Delete as stated above. Best solution. --Dominic 04:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge. The operators are important.--Jusjih 11:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and delete Per CCoMack. ILovEPlankton 00:53, 29 April 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. Angr (t • c) 11:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:OSPALeague (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Redundant per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Online Soccer Project Alpha (2nd nomination) - running its template through process here. - Mailer Diablo 06:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Mailer Diablo --Andy123(talk) 10:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per nom. ILovEPlankton 00:54, 29 April 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. Angr (t • c) 10:48, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Japan map (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Delete. It's a copyright tag that basically says "I don't know what the copyright on this image is, but I'm uploading it anyway on the off-chance that it's a free license". We don't need that sort of image, and we don't need this tag. --Carnildo 06:11, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. --Andy123(talk) 10:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --Dominic 04:12, 28 April 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. Angr (t • c) 10:42, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:SockpuppetCheckuserNoBlock (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Recently, Tifego (talk · contribs) attempted to create this template, intending to tag the only page of a user, who is not yet proven himself or herself as sockpuppet. The template is the same as Template:SockpuppetCheckuser and doesn't include the phrase "has been blocked indefinitely". It is not currently used on other userpages and looks pointless than the main tag. Although, comfirmed or verified sock puppets that are found by Checkuser are generally permablocked and tagged with {{SockpuppetCheckuser}}. I don't think no one is ever going to use it wisely. -- ADNghiem501 04:49, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• He was proven a sockpuppet; the Checkuser came back confirmed that he is a sockpuppet. But, go ahead and delete this template if you want, because it can be replaced just as well by the "confirmed by evidence" template there is no template to replace it but I don't really care anyway. –Tifego^(t) _{04:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)}[reply]

• • Oh I see. BTW, I subst'ed the tag you placed, so I could easily edit to remove the tfd notice and non-existent category from it. It won't be deleted on the sock's page. -- ADNghiem501 05:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. ILovEPlankton 00:57, 29 April 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. Angr (t • c) 10:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:United States infobox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
This is an orphaned template that isn't used in the main namespace. Brendenhull seems to have marked this article for deletion 3 days ago, but there was never an entry made here in the log. Andrew c 01:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete template orphaned and will probably not be used in many articles. --Andy123(talk) 10:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, It is most likly not being used anymore and, again, each article doesn't need to make a whole new template for just that article. --Dominic 04:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The template is just a copy of what is on United States of America, which already uses an infobox. And how many articles can be about just the United States of America? --Primate^#101 03:09, 8 May 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.