Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 February 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 section.

The result of the debate was speedy delete T3 by User:East718. Non-admin close. JPG-GR (talk) 03:01, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:Please don't not edit this page (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Delete; nonsensical. — Libcub (talk) 23:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. --Snigbrook ^(talk) 00:18, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy delete test page, and tagged as such. JPG-GR (talk) 02:18, 23 February 2008 (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 was delete. Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 23:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:British-Regions (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Delete. Superseded long time ago by {{British dependencies}}. — Darwinek (talk) 10:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - superseded by {{United Kingdom constituents and affiliations}} and the one mentioned above. --Snigbrook ^(talk) 00:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Unused per nom. —MJCdetroit ^(yak) 03:53, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
• Template:MergeVote insert any missed links like (Alderney, Herm, Sark) with {{United Kingdom constituents and affiliations}} and then delete -- UKPhoenix79 (talk) 09:58, 23 February 2008 (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 debate was delete. —Animum (talk) 02:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Template:Countries of the Indosphere (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

After reading the article Indosphere I think it is quite useless to keep this template. The concept of Indosphere in itself does not seem to have widespread academic acceptance. Furthermore even if Wikipedia can have an article on what seems to be a fringe theory, it is totally wrong to spam several country articles with such a POV template as this one. Would the Wikipedia community consider acceptable to have similar templates for the global area of influence of the United States or China? I think not. Therefore, I'm proposing the deletion of this template.. Victor12 (talk) 04:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Too tendentious. For example, Britain and China are arguably in the Indosphere due to the Raj, Journey to the West and other influences. Colonel Warden (talk) 13:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete: There are far too many countries that could be listed that would render the template useless. Per nom. Seicer (t | c) 16:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete: Thegreyanomaly (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2008 (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.