Template talk:dprotected

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 02:37, 14 May 2008 by Trey56 (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Current revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
DELETED!
This is the talk page of a deleted article. Please do not participate in the discussions archived here. If you can provide a reason for the existence of this page that hasn't been discussed below, you may start a new section. Please refer to the inclusion guidelines that are generally applied to judge an article's merit.

Hmm... I don't think we have ever protected a page because of a content dispute, and I don't see it happening any time soon... do we need this template? --phlip TC 11:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

To my knowledge, this has not yet happened, and with the culture of editing that we have, this is not going to happen. Disputes are discussions on talk pages, and edit warring will result in notices given to users, not in protecting a page. We do not need this template. Loafing 11:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Could this template be referring to Who Said What Now? Bad Bad Guy 12:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Mm, I suppose it could, but that's not a situation that comes up every day either. I don't see much need for this template; if we really need such a template in the future it could be easily recreated, but probably it will just sit around unused. -- Mithent 14:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't think this template was created for WSWN. It's not locked because of a content dispute. Loafing 22:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
It isn't appropriate for WSWN, that's for sure. I use a template like this regularly at Wikipedia; however, we never have disputes here that require protection, so I can't see it as being likely we'll ever need this. Heimstern Läufer 22:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Since the history tab reveals that the template's creator was that previously banned IP Address user who kept griping (lack of a better word) about the protection of WSWN, that's probably the article it's meant for. But since it's irrelevant to the situation I see no reason not to delete it. Bad Bad Guy 23:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
We tend to make guidlines, rules and notices in this wiki based on need, not prevention. What I'm saying is similar to Wikipedia's BEANS page. There was no known case in HRWiki where users edited an article in an aggressive way to make a point, the thing this template supposedly imply. Therefore, I don't think we need one. If the creator of this template meant to put it in an article that's protected for another reason, then I don't see a need for it, either. In contrast of {{tbd}} and {{rename}}, that their appearance on the top of an article encourage users to give their opinion on the talk page, putting this template will only create unrest when seen. If, for some reason, an article is protected and a user want to know why, a notice on the talk page will be more appropriate. Casual HRWiki readers that do not edit don't need to know about our internal struggle with rogue users. In short, the template have no need here. Delete. Elcool (talk)(contribs) 09:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Let's also count the comment DrPepper42 made on Talk:Main Page#Template Bad Bad Guy 01:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be any support for this template other than by its creator. As has been discussed above, we rarely, if ever, protect pages as a result of edit wars over content. Those disputes are typically resolved by contacting the relevant users and taking the disagreement to the talk pages. So, I've deleted this template. Trey56 02:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Personal tools