Template talk:PL:species

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Deletion debate[edit]

Green check.svg

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, though feel free to discuss its conclusions.


Template:PL:pedia

etc. are all redundant to {{wikipedia}}, {{wikiversity}}, {{wikisource}}, {{wikispecies}}. What should be done about these templates? TeleComNasSprVen 00:35, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

  • Keep all. One could just as well say that {{wikipedia}} and so on are redundant to these. ;-)   It's kind of funny: the nomination just above this one is trying to eliminate a box template on the grounds that it's bulky and redundant to a one-liner, and here you're trying to the reverse. Though in your defense, the interproject boxes and interproject one-liners are actually equivalent, or nearly so.RuakhTALK 00:47, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep. I might support deleting {{wikipedia}} et al, however, because in combination with other right-hand side elements, they cause IE to display a great blank spot. —Internoob (DiscCont) 01:50, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep all, per Internoob, I'd be more likely to support deleting wikipedia (etc.) as it's boxy and causes spacing problems. Up till now I think we've always considered to spacing problems to be offset by the value of the template. Still, I use {{pedia}} not {{wikipedia}}. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep 'em, per the other keepers.​—msh210 (talk) 17:35, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: These templates were never tagged with {{rfd}}. I've now tagged them.​—msh210 (talk) 17:38, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Kept all.​—msh210 (talk) 16:29, 10 November 2010 (UTC)