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 Speedy keep. Non-admin closing based on procedural argument. Nomination had nothing to do with Tfd. Any issues related to the image used in the template should be raised elsewhere. Wikipedia:Media copyright questions could be a good start. Debresser (talk) 19:54, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Administrator topicon (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This template uses an image (File:Wikipedia Administrator.svg) that is released under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license, which means that it may be used only if the author is properly attributed. Yet, the image is not linked to its info page, which means that the author is not attributed in any way. So, using this template represents a copyright violation. Since the only purpose of this template is to (illegaly) show the image, I propose it be deleted. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:31, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Wut? - This is a top icon, indicating a user is an admin, and it links to the apropriate page. It also offers an option to use a different icon. If there is a problem with a particular image, it is certainly not a reason to delete the entire template. Also, the WMF allows the use of its images without attribution requirements when used on WMF project sites; note that the top-left logo also does not point to its description page, and is therefor also "illegal". -- [[User:Edokter]] ((talk)) 16:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  I know what topicon is. Are topicons excepted from copyright rules? Does their author not need to be attributed? Yes, the Wikimedia Foundation allows the use of its images, but this image is credited to Commons:User:ANGELUS, not to the WMF, so their permission is irrelevant. I'm not sure what is your solution here. Should we ignore copyright rules? Vanjagenije (talk) 19:52, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Edokter —PC-XT+ 16:52, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 relisted on 2015 February 10. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox nhsc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Infobox historic site (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

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 merge. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:35, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox national youth handball team (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) (Only three transclusions)

Template:Infobox national handball team (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) (133 transclusions)

Propose merging Template:Infobox national youth handball team with Template:Infobox national handball team.
Differ only in the name & label of the 'Olympics' parameters. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:48, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge - I support this merge proposal provided that the distinct parameters of the youth template are incorporated into the surviving generic template. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:30, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge, assuming Dirtlawyer1's provision will be accounted for. —PC-XT+ 17:07, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kingdoms of Sri Lanka (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

A widely used template already exists, Template:Sri Lankan former states Blackknight12 (talk) 04:33, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Here is a navbox and a sidebar. The sidebar has more content, and is more informative, but also adds references to the article. The navbox probably shouldn't share a page with the sidebar, but could possibly be used on other pages? If not, I guess it could be deleted. —PC-XT+ 17:05, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per Blackknight12 and existing template has more detail and new one fails to cover all kingdoms. --Anton^Talk 16:32, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.