| Revision as of 01:51, 15 July 2007 editDGG (talk | contribs)316,874 edits →[]: Question← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:14, 15 July 2007 edit undoRmhermen (talk | contribs)Administrators62,561 edits →July 15Next edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| |}</div></noinclude> | |}</div></noinclude> | ||
| ===July 15=== | ===July 15=== | ||
| ==== ] ==== | |||
| :{{lt|FBI Wanted}} | |||
| Very bad idea. Originally nominated for speedy. — ] 03:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==== ] ==== | ==== ] ==== | ||
| :{{lt|Quo}} | :{{lt|Quo}} | ||
Revision as of 03:14, 15 July 2007
| < July 14 | July 16 > |
|---|
July 15
Template:FBI Wanted
Very bad idea. Originally nominated for speedy. — Rmhermen 03:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Template:Quo
"Unnecessary redirect from quotes" is not a speedy deletion criterion. The closest thing to it is CSD R3, and even if this case were considered part of that deletion criteria, then the template is redundant to {{db-r3}}. — Titoxd 00:15, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
- Question These are almost always created when an article mistakenly titled in quotes is moved to a correct title without the quotes. Probably the person moving the article does not generally realize that the redirect will be left behind. In general they're worthless, nobody searching is likely to use them deliberately, and any external search engine would find them perfectly well. personally, I'd consider it a case of R3, and the template should just be adjusted to indicate this. But if we do not agree about the merit of having the quotes, then it should not be speedy but go to RfD every time & the template should be modified accordingly. 01:51, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Template:Copyrighted-navyphotos
Unused, depreciated template. Its associated category, Category:Navyphotos.co.uk photographs, is welcome to stay because many of these images are still being used under claims of fair use, though I have failed to categorize them in the Navyphotos.co.uk category. —Remember the dot 00:53, 15 July 2007 (UTC)