Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 January 8

< January 7	January 9 >

January 8

Template:Hunter Carter

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. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Hunter Carter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template that was most likely meant to be an article that was previously deleted. (Hunter Carter) J36miles (talk) 22:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete, there's no use for it. De728631 (talk) 22:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

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:I have a question

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

Template:I have a question (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused and not needed template. J36miles (talk) 21:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete, totally useless since it is doing nothing - maybe the user wanted to place a {{helpme}}. mabdul 22:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
• Speedy deletion per G2, test edit. De728631 (talk) 22:17, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

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:Filmbiorationale

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. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Filmbiorationale (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

since User:Carnildo converted the template to a standard rationale, this template is totally useless and should be merged/redirected. mabdul 11:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete: It was mostly useless before, as well, since it was in a format that bots couldn't process. --Carnildo (talk) 23:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

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:Papa Vs Pretty

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 No Consensus. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Papa Vs Pretty (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Hardly navigates anything. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

• Keep, three navigation articles with transclusions and a potential new articles (already mentioned in the navtemp). mabdul 22:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

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:Lana Del Rey

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. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 05:43, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Lana Del Rey (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

With only one album, and two singles, there is no need for a template for this artist. A template is for navigational use, and with only three entries, it is quite irrelevant and useless. — Status {^talk_contribs 01:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

• Delete. Per the nomination. | ^help_dןǝɥ | 01:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
• Keep: Has more than three entries now.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:58, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
• Keep 7 articles (including bio) is enough.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:25, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
• Keep I've removed a couple of links which were a bit of a stretch but two LPs, two EPs, two singles is more than enough. Pichpich (talk) 23:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment Both EP articles and her debut album were created by the same editor, and have been proposed for deletion as they fail notably. Editor seems to be article creation happy. Ignoring those (which will probably end up being deleted), there is just no use for this template. — Status {^talk_contribs 01:44, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
    • Comment Author of the articles has been banned for being a sockpuppet, and the articles have also been deleted. We're back to 3 articles. — Status {^talk_contribs 02:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

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.