Template talk:one usage note

Template:one usage note
It had been used in the entries one, once, alone, one's, and atone, but per a RFC at one, I subst:ed it, shortened it, and put it in the pronunciation sections of all of the entries. I propose we delete it, but I anticipate the counter-argument that it could be useful to replace the current template text with the shortened version and re-insert it into the entries in place of the subst:ed text, so as to standardise (have the same text in all of the entries). — Beobach 02:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * These doesn't seem like usage notes, also starting with a rhetorical question seems very undictionary-like. Seems more like miscellaneous (albeit interesting) information. Delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:25, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Not sure if it belongs in a pronunciation or an etymology section, but tend toward the latter; but that's irrelevant for this RFDO. I think this should vary by page, not be standardized, so that, for example, [ [alone]] can discuss why it's pronounced that way, also making some mention of one, while [ [one]] can discuss why it's pronounced that way, also making some mention of alone. There aren't enough entries to make a template necessary. Don't use; and, strong delete if not to be used. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 16:37, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:36, 24 December 2010 (UTC)