Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 January 4

January 4

edit
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. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:RadioShack riders (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Per here. Just like Agritubel in that discussion, Team RadioShack is now a defunct cycling team, and in that regards, the template is now redundant. Craig(talk) 22:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no longer needed and unused. SeveroTC 14:11, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
delete since it's now defunct. Frietjes (talk) 17:39, 11 January 2012 (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. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Vandalism-high-risk (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

We don't need to put a big flag on an article announcing that it is at a high risk of vandalism. In addition to being a BEANS violation, it is unlikely to have any real effect. Anyway, if an article is at that level of vandalism, it should just be protected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{Vandalism-high-risk}}

RubinkumarTalk 23:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


"Comment if this is kept, it should be a talk page template, like the hightraffic template is. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 00:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)").[reply]
I made this in response to that comment. If that one is kept, I think this should be deleted. RubinkumarTalk 21:49, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The IP wasn't saying that there should be such a template (and I do not agree with adding a banner to the talk page of an article indicating that it might be vandalized); rather, he was saying that if consensus is to keep, it should be off kept article pages. Reaper Eternal (talk) 22:07, 6 January 2012 (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. -FASTILY (TALK) 00:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:University of Da Nang (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Navbox; all but two links are red. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:09, 4 January 2012 (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 now deleted as a test page. Frietjes (talk) 17:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Promo shot 1978. Photo:Al Walter (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Unused template created in a mistaken attempt to provide information for File:Dumb blondes 008.jpg. —teb728 t c 07:20, 4 January 2012 (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.