Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 November 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 3

[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 after subst:'ing the only transclusion Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:07, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:IE etymology ref (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Links to Tower of Babel which has really obsolete entries (no laryngeals). Also, I'm not sure whether that site qualifies as RS. One mainspace transclusion. Delete? Or change to reference LIV, NIL or another modern source? ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 21:17, 3 November 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 unused

Template:Sportscentcat1 (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused. Frietjes (talk) 16:07, 3 November 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 keep as a useful marker for bots Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:14, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:No admin backlog (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template contains no content itself. Wikipedian 2 (talk) 09:11, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a empty template to make it easier for bots to have a placeholder for {{admin backlog}}, it shouldn't be deleted. AzaToth 14:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
keep unless there is a simple way to add a functional disabled flag to {{admin backlog}}. Frietjes (talk) 16:07, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The purpose of this template is to say "bots, please place {{admin backlog}} here if the page is backlogged". Because it's an instruction to bots, there's not much point in it showing content to humans. --ais523 22:42, 6 November 2014 (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.
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 to delete. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:19, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Presidents of Bangladesh Islami Chatra Shibir (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unnecessary template with only a few person with their own articles in Wikipedia. Rahat (Talk * Contributions) 08:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please be informed that this, like all of wikipedia, is a work in progress. I am extremely surprised at the unprofessional explanatipn and even more unprofessional attitude in filing this nomination. With common sense as my defence, I respectfully oppose the deletion nomination. ~Mohammad Hossain~ 11:10, 3 November 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.