Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 December 14

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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:40, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox KTM Komuter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

single use infobox, now merged with KTM Komuter. Frietjes (talk) 15:46, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 02:09, 16 December 2013 (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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:39, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ETS Transit Line (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

unused hard-coded infobox. Frietjes (talk) 15:34, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 02:09, 16 December 2013 (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.

talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages

)

Empty template since 2009. Leyo 16:54, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the associated template clearly needs documentation. Perhaps you should write some up? Like what's the purpose of this chemistry template? -- 70.50.148.105 (talk) 04:42, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: do you propose to delete the documentation page? If so, Keep. -DePiep (talk) 17:51, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The template is in use on hundreds of pages, so that is reason to improve the doc page but not delete it. --RL0919 (talk) 19:12, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted

to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Relisting comment: Only four reviewers after two weeks

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jax 0677 (talk) 03:09, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• keep, should be improved, rather than deleted. Frietjes (talk) 18:58, 15 December 2013 (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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:19, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Rouse Properties (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template has been split into {{Rouse Properties East}} and {{Rouse Properties West}} due to size issues. Dough4872 02:03, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Keep "Template:Rouse Properties", but reformat to include both {{Rouse Properties East}} and {{Rouse Properties West}}, similar to {{Simon Property Group}}. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:54, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and split per Jax 0677. Compare {{
  General Growth Properties}}, {{CBL Properties}}, {{Simon Property Group}}. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:56, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment Delete - On second thought, it seems that the only transclusions of the Rouse template are in {{
  General Growth Properties}} (perhaps I am mistaken). --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:04, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• {{
  General Growth Properties}} so there is no need to nest them at {{Rouse Properties}} unless it is desired to have the Rouse Properties templates separate from the General Growth Properties templates. Dough4872 03:25, 14 December 2013 (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 Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:43, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Delete' per nominator....William 03:14, 14 December 2013 (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.