Misplaced Pages

:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 July 15 - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DGG (talk | contribs) at 01:51, 15 July 2007 ([]: Question). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 01:51, 15 July 2007 by DGG (talk | contribs) ([]: Question)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
< July 14 July 16 >

July 15

Template:Quo

Template:Quo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

"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

Template:Copyrighted-navyphotos (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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)