Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 February 5#Template:Idaho Vandals baseball coach navbox

: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 keep, the template has been significantly expanded. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{Tfd links|Idaho Vandals baseball coach navbox}}

Navbox with only two links in it, one of which is a red link. The only blue link is the only page the template is used on so it is essentially just being used to link to itself. -DJSasso (talk) 20:29, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

• Strong keep on a bad faith nomination, especially considering another respectable college baseball editor has said he would research the coaching history further. Jrcla2 (talk) 21:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
• Keep your bad faith accusations to yourself. At the time I nominated it Billcasey had not yet commented. It was a single use template with only one link which linked to the page it was being used on. It was a completely appropriate nomination at the time. Perhaps had you actually filled out the navbox completely when you created it, it wouldn't have been an issue. -DJSasso (talk) 14:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NENAN, unless expanded. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:03, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
• Now keep since it has been expanded. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:39, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
• Keep I was able to find a list of coaches and cross-reference enough years using sources on blue linked names and the Idaho yearbooks (google the year and Gem of the Mountains to check) to believe the list. Navbox now includes 5 blue links and several red links with sources available to encourage article creation. Billcasey905 (talk) 01:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
• Speedy keep It's long been established that coaching navboxes for Division I baseball programs and historical equivalents warrant a navbox. DJSasso's comment "only two links in it, one of which is a red link" is now mute given that the navbox has been expanded and now links to five different existing biography articles. The NENAN above argument is meaningless in isolation. In a vacuum it could be said about any navbox. Jweiss11 (talk)
• Keep now that there are sufficient blue links. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
• Keep for the reasons mentioned above. Mizzou415 (talk) 21:09, 6 February 2013 (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 discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:35, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{Tfd links|Player1}}

unused. Frietjes (talk) 20:10, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

• Delete --Izno (talk) 19:26, 6 February 2013 (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 discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:35, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{Tfd links|Serie A1 Team}}

single use infobox, could be replaced by {{tl|infobox sports team}} or {{tl|Pro inline hockey team}} or merged with {{tl|Infobox MLRH Team}}. Frietjes (talk) 17:30, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

• Delete. I'm going to advocate for a straight up delete after replacement. I would not like to see a merge conclusion. --Izno (talk) 19:26, 6 February 2013 (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 discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:42, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{Tfd links|Florida Fusion roster}}

:{{Tfd links|Asiago Vipers roster}}

single use templates, now merged with articles. Frietjes (talk) 17:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

• Delete both. --Izno (talk) 19:26, 6 February 2013 (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 discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{Tfd links|Student}}

only used on the 4 subjects listed, which all have "see also"s which are more than adequate for this purpose. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

• delete, already covered in the see also section. Frietjes (talk) 16:48, 6 February 2013 (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 discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{Tfd links|Non-free Mexico-NIP}}

Unused, and given the NC term ,seemingly covered by exisiting non-free templates. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:45, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

• Delete - the {{tl|Non-free fair use}} could be more adequate Alx 91 (talk) 06:03, 6 February 2013 (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 discussion was delete Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

:{{Tfd links|From UA Football Logos}}

Unused, and in any case logo's are not necessarily covered by the exemption shown. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

• delete Frietjes (talk) 16:48, 6 February 2013 (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.