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) 22:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ficha del iate (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

It is preferable to put the infobox directly in the article instead of storing it as a template. That way, it is also possible to include a logo in the template without violating WP:NFCC#9. I have substituted this template in the article, and I suggest that we simply get rid of it. Stefan2 (talk) 20:28, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Delete - probably created due to misunderstanding; not a useful template. -- Whpq (talk) 21:02, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The template was created by Arielz77 (talk · contribs) and only edited by that person before I nominated the template for deletion. Shortly after I nominated it for deletion, the creator blanked the page. That might count as a request for G7, unless User:Yintan's reversion prevents that. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:26, 19 April 2013 (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) 22:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Call for Citizen's Action Party/meta/shortname (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is one of the several political party templates. However, the subject of this template, Call for Citizen's Action Party, doesn't have a Wikipedia article. –HTD 16:34, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with other Philippine political parties to a unified Philippine template system -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 04:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• delete, we don't need these for single articles. just do this and the problem is solved. Frietjes (talk) 13:58, 20 April 2013 (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) 22:41, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Call for Citizen's Action Party/meta/color (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is one of the several political party templates. However, the subject of this template, Call for Citizen's Action Party, doesn't have a Wikipedia article. –HTD 16:34, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with other Philippine political parties to a unified Philippine template system -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 04:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• delete, we don't need these for single articles. just do this and the problem is solved. Frietjes (talk) 13:58, 20 April 2013 (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 Red (Taylor Swift album), relisting the rest since they were not properly tagged. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:41, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Red (Taylor Swift album) track listing (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

((4 (Beyoncé Knowles album) track listing))

((I Am... Sasha Fierce track listing))

((B'Day track listing))

((The Emancipation of Mimi track listing))

Per previous discussions on Album tracklisting templates, there are still a few missing to get deleted. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:10, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per prior consensus. Frietjes (talk) 13:59, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete since redundant to ((Taylor Swift singles)), ((Beyoncé Knowles songs)) and ((Mariah Carey singles)). --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:57, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that only Template:Red (Taylor Swift album) track listing has been properly tagged with the ((tfd)) notification. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 03:23, 25 April 2013 (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, the templates are unused. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:42, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Turella class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Moby Wonder class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Finlandia class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Athena class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Svea class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Mariella class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Template:Viking Saga class (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Not officially recognized civilian ship class; see previous TfD. Tupsumato (talk) 07:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Ship classes are conventionally named by the first ship of the class; this isn't something "officially recognised" but something that has been done in maritime classification for centuries. If there is a class of sister ships, the class is named after the first ship - it is only if it was otherwise named that "official recognition" would be required. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:44, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whether traditional or not, Wikipedia should not be inventing names for things. There is never an appropriate time for Wikipedia to be the sole source of a particular piece of data. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:58, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • My point exactly. The above cruiseferry classes I have nominated for deletion are only used in Wikipedia and not e.g. the shipyard or the shipping company. Tupsumato (talk) 10:10, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, if not supported by independent WP:RS (at a glance usage of these is in blogs or is from WP itself).Davidships (talk) 20:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment It is the display and functionality created by a template that matters, not its name. ((Navbox with collapsible groups)) isn't an officially recognised name for anything but it is still a legitimate template. However, these templates do indeed display purported classes of ship and this may be a problem. Sadly, I don't have enough background knowledge of ships to give a view on whether these templates are appropriate. Thincat (talk) 10:00, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The appropriateness of the template names notwithstanding, none of these templates actually navigate anything. Resolute 00:17, 21 April 2013 (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.