Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 May 22

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 speedy deleted for having no content. Angr (t • c) 23:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:2005-2006 Student Council infobox

Template:2005-2006 Student Council infobox (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Empty and unused template. Stephane Charette 22:01, 22 May 2006 (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 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. - Mailer Diablo 14:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:AcademyAwardBestActor

Template:AcademyAwardBestActor (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Too big, too muddled, unnecessary. Arniep 19:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. I think a good idea would be to seperate this into different decades templates like that, but if that isn't possible I support deletion. Treima 19:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, it's just going to get longer every year. Academy Award for Best Actor has the complete list, including nonwinning nominees, and each winner has (or should have) a succession box. That's quite enough. Angr (t • c) 19:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This is too long, and as Angr said a succession box would do the trick quite nicely to link to the article with the full list. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 00:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This is just template overkill, and the same info could be better represented per Angr.--Pharos 01:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. Perhaps this template should be neatened up to conform with the style set by the Best Picture Winner Template. Also, this template should probably be placed only on the article of the Actor, not the film concerned. If that can be done, I'd tend to support, along with the suggestion of the creation of a Best Actress, and a Best Director template, as they, along with Picture, and Actor, are the major, and most important awrds. I don't think that a succesion box suffices, due to the fact that an actor is not succeded by next years winner, they are all just on the list of Best Actor. It's not a title that you keep for a year. It's an award. 61.69.12.11 02:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I was the one who streamlined all actors' pages before by putting succession boxes in them. But someone commented that one actor does not succeed the other as "Academy Award winner"--the list just grows. So I suggested to make a template instead of a succession box. Coincidentally, I suggested this to the very same editor who is proposing this deletion, though he didn't reply to it. In any case, I think template is more relevant than a succession box (i.e. what is the importance of knowing who preceded this year's winner--it is not like a succession box for presidency wherein one's succession and term of office is affected by the previous one). The existing template should just be modified. I am in the process of reformating the Best Picture template (for a sample of how it will appear in a specific article, see The Lost Weekend. Instead of providing the whole list, only a 20-year span is made available, while links to the other 20-year spans and the complete list is provided. I did the same thing for the Nobel Prize laureates (see template:Nobel Medicine before, when these were also proposed for deletion due to the long list.Joey80 04:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• That would be best, I think, as the exsisting Best Picture template is a little too unwieldly. But I do think that templates are required for Best Picture, Actor, Actress, and Director. .... 10:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete use a category man --larsinio (poke)^(prod) 16:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Use seperate categories for each decade, then make them all sub-categories of one Academy Award Best Actor category. —gorgan_almighty 12:11, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This should be a category included for each actor and a list where the film titles can be included. It's not the proper use of a template. Slowmover 18:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Simply doesn't make sense as a template. --Cyde↔Weys 22:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Pavel Vozenilek 19:36, 27 May 2006 (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 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. - Mailer Diablo 14:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Free Forum Hosts

Template:Free Forum Hosts (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Not many of these in wikipedia, IMHO the template is not needed in the wikipedia. bdude Talk 08:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete PointlessQuizQuick 15:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, use cats. Pavel Vozenilek 19:36, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Already covered by Category:Free_Forum_Hosts. -- Zawersh 05:22, 31 May 2006 (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 page.