Forum:Protecting pages: Difference between revisions
From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Shadowcrest (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
::I realize that you and the others don't do it to spite YAV, but that's what it does. Unless you wish to retroactively protect others' archives, I don't see why admin's archives and the like should remain protected. Prot isn't a tool that should be used willy-nilly either. --<span style="font-family:vivaldi; font-size:12pt">[[User:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4">Shadow</span>]][[User talk:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4;">crest</span>]]</span> 23:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | ::I realize that you and the others don't do it to spite YAV, but that's what it does. Unless you wish to retroactively protect others' archives, I don't see why admin's archives and the like should remain protected. Prot isn't a tool that should be used willy-nilly either. --<span style="font-family:vivaldi; font-size:12pt">[[User:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4">Shadow</span>]][[User talk:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4;">crest</span>]]</span> 23:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
The standard for protection that was here when I showed up was that anything in the user namespace short of the main user talk page could be protected simply through the request of the user. In this case, it seems pointless for me to put on my own talk page, "hey can you (I) protect my (your) archives?" [[User:Clarinet Hawk|Clarinet Hawk]] <small>([[User talk:Clarinet Hawk|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Clarinet Hawk|contributions]])</small> 00:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | The standard for protection that was here when I showed up was that anything in the user namespace short of the main user talk page could be protected simply through the request of the user. In this case, it seems pointless for me to put on my own talk page, "hey can you (I) protect my (your) archives?" [[User:Clarinet Hawk|Clarinet Hawk]] <small>([[User talk:Clarinet Hawk|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Clarinet Hawk|contributions]])</small> 00:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
:I see... well, that explains why it's been done then. Thanks for the clarification. Would it be worth rescinding the protection in order to unclutter [[Special:ProtectedPages]]? Particularly since there's no prominent reason to keep them protected in the first place? --<span style="font-family:vivaldi; font-size:12pt">[[User:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4">Shadow</span>]][[User talk:Shadowcrest|<span style="color:#4682b4;">crest</span>]]</span> 02:08, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
I agree with Shadowcrest here. I've never seen any IPs make any edits to archives of any admins, although it might have happened while I wasn't here. Also, why does the Archive Template "plead" users/IPs not to edit the talk page if they can't anyway? <span style="border:2px outset red;background-color:black;-moz-border-radius:1px">'''[[User:Blue Ninjakoopa|<span style="color:Blue;">Blue</span>]] [[User talk:Blue Ninjakoopa|<span style="color:blue">Ninjakoopa</span>]]'''</span> 00:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | I agree with Shadowcrest here. I've never seen any IPs make any edits to archives of any admins, although it might have happened while I wasn't here. Also, why does the Archive Template "plead" users/IPs not to edit the talk page if they can't anyway? <span style="border:2px outset red;background-color:black;-moz-border-radius:1px">'''[[User:Blue Ninjakoopa|<span style="color:Blue;">Blue</span>]] [[User talk:Blue Ninjakoopa|<span style="color:blue">Ninjakoopa</span>]]'''</span> 00:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 21:08, January 6, 2009
Forums: Index → Watercooler → Protecting pages
Admins and protecting talks
Can someone please explain to me why admins feel the need to protect their archives or their talks, despite the fact that various non-admins have archives and nearly all moves of talkpages not by their owners would be vandalism? Unless you wish to protect everyone's archives, the parallel between such actions and YAV are amusing. --Shadowcrest 22:58, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Move vandals have an unpleasant tendency to target admins' user pages/talk pages, and some have had archives vandalised. It's not intended to counteract YAV in any way. Miles (talk) 23:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- They have a tendency to target people that revert their vandalism, actually. Which would include all the rollbackers by default- that's what rollback is for, isn't it?- as well as various other users who do not have rollback that revert anyway. So there goes that argument.
- I realize that you and the others don't do it to spite YAV, but that's what it does. Unless you wish to retroactively protect others' archives, I don't see why admin's archives and the like should remain protected. Prot isn't a tool that should be used willy-nilly either. --Shadowcrest 23:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
The standard for protection that was here when I showed up was that anything in the user namespace short of the main user talk page could be protected simply through the request of the user. In this case, it seems pointless for me to put on my own talk page, "hey can you (I) protect my (your) archives?" Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 00:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I see... well, that explains why it's been done then. Thanks for the clarification. Would it be worth rescinding the protection in order to unclutter Special:ProtectedPages? Particularly since there's no prominent reason to keep them protected in the first place? --Shadowcrest 02:08, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Shadowcrest here. I've never seen any IPs make any edits to archives of any admins, although it might have happened while I wasn't here. Also, why does the Archive Template "plead" users/IPs not to edit the talk page if they can't anyway? Blue Ninjakoopa 00:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
