Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 March 27

< March 26	March 28 >

March 27 edit

Template:Editnotices/Page/Adolf Hitler edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template(s) or module(s) 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).

The result of the discussion was delete. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:06, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotices/Page/Adolf Hitler (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

I think this template is redundant. It isn't as frequently vandalized as current event articles. Interstellarity (talk) 23:05, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS ("It isn't as frequently vandalized as current event articles") is not a valid policy-based argument for deletion. Adolf Hitler is not currently as vandalized as it once was, but it's also under ECP, and no protection is intended to be permanent, so it could be lifted at any time. I do not see that having the editnotice is doing any harm whatsoever, and if it prevents even a handful of vandalizing edits over the course of a year, it's worthwhile having in place.
I'll note that the nominator has never edited the article [1] or its talk page [2], so is not really part of the community of editors which protects the article from vandalism and inappropriate edits, and would therefore be less aware of the necessity for the editnotice from personal experience. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:26, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also point out that the nomination reminds me of the umbrella argument: "Ever since I started using this umbrella, I haven't gotten wet once. This is proof that there is no need for this umbrella." Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A neutral pointer to this discussion has been placed on Talk:Adolf Hitler. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:35, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see this as necessary either. The page is perma-ECPd today and into the foreseeable future, which seems sufficient to have entirely stopped all vandalism. That leaves the second half of the edit notice, which even if someone had started reading the first half (and not succumbed to banner blindness), they surely would not have made it to the second half. Delete --Izno (talk) 14:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
delete, as mentioned above, the page is ECprotected, so that should generally solve the problem, so this seems unnecessary. Frietjes (talk) 14:51, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the usefulness is not zero, but it's low enough to not be worth the banner bloat. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:32, 16 April 2021 (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).