Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 January 6

< January 5	January 7 >

January 6

Template:Standard Liège seasons

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) 01:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Standard Liège seasons (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

moved the seasons into the main club template which I just created, as it wasn't very big at the moment, didn't think this was no longer needed. Govvy (talk) 15:17, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant to Template:Standard Liège. C 679 15:35, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - currently serves no purpose & is redundant. Giant Snowman 12:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - yes it is redundant, but it's been around for a while so we should keep the blue link. Creating a new almost identical template seems a little waste of that, wouldn't it be better to move the old template and expand it?
talk) 15:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Nobody is suggesting creating a new template... - one already exists with more information. Giant Snowman 17:47, 15 January 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.

Template:Cities in the Gaza Strip

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 redirect Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:00, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages

)

Duplicate of

Template:Cities in Palestinian National Authority areas, Gaza Strip cities are covered there. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Oppose - there is an WP:DUE and WP:RS to present the current situation where PNA no longer controls Gaza. The article per List of cities in the Gaza Strip, which has long been created.Greyshark09 (talk) 08:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I just made an edit to the Palestinian cities template that should render the PNA objection moot. The Palestinian cities template has a section for GS cities, so there's for the GS city template. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 13:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support The GS is still a part of Palestine, just with a different administration. No official secession and no recognition. The main template for Palestinian cities makes a note of the Gaza Strip's situation since 2007. To still have a template for cities in the Gaza Strip alone therefore is unnecessary. --Al Ameer son (talk) 16:23, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the other template, as a useful redirect name -- 76.65.128.43 (talk) 06:37, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't see the point of a redirect if one template is already covering the other. As for
Template:Cities in Palestinian National Authority areas would it be best to rename it just "Cities in Palestinian areas" ? Then have footnote of who controls what? Govvy (talk) 08:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
- Comment isn't that the point of having a redirect? That the other template covers it already. If it didn't then you wouldn't have a redirect, you'd have separate templates -- 76.65.128.43 (talk) 06:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or keep. What's wrong with the current name? No opinion on whether this should be a separate template, but we shouldn't make it a redlink. Nyttend (talk) 02:48, 16 January 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.

Template:Vorë

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) 01:28, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

This quote-on-quote "navigation" template has only 1 entry. Therefore, it is hardly a navigation tool at all. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete, not enough links. Frietjes (talk) 16:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Too small of a settlement to justify a navbox. -
Talkback) 00:33, 7 January 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.