Template talk:ladecl1

RFDO discussion: April–May 2014

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others.

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

---

Useless Latin templates?

Moved from Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April#Useless Latin templates?

I don't see the purpose of the following templates: {{ladecl1}}, {{ladecl3}}, {{ladecl3:b2c}}, {{ladecl3:2e}}, {{ladecl3n}}, {{ladecl3com}}. --Fsojic (talk) 21:14, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I can use my bot to orphan them if a consensus is reached. --kc_kennylau (talk) 18:13, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Delete. —CodeCat 18:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't have a terribly strong opinion, but I think there is some merit to having this text in template form. It's manually coded into all the grc templates, and if we ever decide to change it, we'll have to do a lot of recoding. I think that its use should be limited to templates, and not put directly into entries. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 19:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Our declension templates already include information about the declension type and such, so these templates don't serve any purpose. —CodeCat 20:00, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Huh. For some reason I thought they were included in some of the templates. Nevermind. Orphan and Delete -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 21:09, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I will start to orphan them tomorrow if there is no objection. --kc_kennylau (talk) 08:39, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Started orphaning. --kc_kennylau (talk) 05:32, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned. --kc_kennylau (talk) 05:41, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Deleted. —CodeCat 19:35, 11 May 2014 (UTC)