Wikipedia talk:Protection policy: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Semiprotection: cmt |
→Semiprotection: reply |
||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
Vaunting of semiprotection is the way to wikipedia failure, censorship and forking. I mean, the use of the template <nowiki>{{pp-protected}}</nowiki> is mandatory according to [[Wikipedia:Rough_guide_to_semi-protection]]. This means that some user can express his preference to not display the padlock image by simply removing it, the better by discussing in talk page. Why was this type of edits contested as disruptive? [[User:Brainfrogk4mon|Brainfrogk4mon]] ([[User talk:Brainfrogk4mon|talk]]) 19:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC) |
Vaunting of semiprotection is the way to wikipedia failure, censorship and forking. I mean, the use of the template <nowiki>{{pp-protected}}</nowiki> is mandatory according to [[Wikipedia:Rough_guide_to_semi-protection]]. This means that some user can express his preference to not display the padlock image by simply removing it, the better by discussing in talk page. Why was this type of edits contested as disruptive? [[User:Brainfrogk4mon|Brainfrogk4mon]] ([[User talk:Brainfrogk4mon|talk]]) 19:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC) |
||
:The template is there for [[WP:accessibility]] reasons. Just because you understand the reason why you cannot edit a page, doesn't mean everyone does it. The image of a padlock, which seems to be your only problem according to all your talk page comments in several places, is not a synonym of censorship, failure nor forking; if anything is a synonym of the failure of those editors that have managed to get a page protected because they can't behave there properly. Even if the padlock is hidden, the page will still be protected as they don't protect the pages, they merely indicate that a page is protected. Not using these templates, as the Spanish Wikipedia does, ''is'' a failure in itself, as it creates the presumption that a page is unprotected and anyone can edit it. And lastly, the image is so small that it cannot create loading problems as you said. The loading problems are created by the general size of the page. [[WP:CC-BY-SA|(CC)]] [[User:Tbhotch|<span style="color: #4B0082;">Tb</span><span style="color: #6082B6;">hotch</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Tbhotch|<big style="color: #555555;">™</big>]]</sup> 20:32, 7 April 2021 (UTC) |
:The template is there for [[WP:accessibility]] reasons. Just because you understand the reason why you cannot edit a page, doesn't mean everyone does it. The image of a padlock, which seems to be your only problem according to all your talk page comments in several places, is not a synonym of censorship, failure nor forking; if anything is a synonym of the failure of those editors that have managed to get a page protected because they can't behave there properly. Even if the padlock is hidden, the page will still be protected as they don't protect the pages, they merely indicate that a page is protected. Not using these templates, as the Spanish Wikipedia does, ''is'' a failure in itself, as it creates the presumption that a page is unprotected and anyone can edit it. And lastly, the image is so small that it cannot create loading problems as you said. The loading problems are created by the general size of the page. [[WP:CC-BY-SA|(CC)]] [[User:Tbhotch|<span style="color: #4B0082;">Tb</span><span style="color: #6082B6;">hotch</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Tbhotch|<big style="color: #555555;">™</big>]]</sup> 20:32, 7 April 2021 (UTC) |
||
:: Appreciating your answer, ''several places'' consist of 2 places: talk page and VP. Anyway the image is an image and has an impact, if we consider billions of connections. The absence of ''Edit source'' already indicates you cannot edit. As well as the reason why you cannot edit a page is displayed in ''Page Information''. The padlock is cool, but it's not symbol of freedom. [[User:Brainfrogk4mon|Brainfrogk4mon]] ([[User talk:Brainfrogk4mon|talk]]) 21:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 21:08, 7 April 2021
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Protection policy page. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 60 days  |
 | The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wikipedia. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic. |
 | This page is not for proposing or discussing edits to protected pages. To request or propose a change to a page that you are not able to edit, place a message on its talk page. If the page is fully protected, you may attract the attention of an admin to make the change by placing the
|
 | This page is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Protection policy page. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
 | Counter-Vandalism Unit | |||
| ||||
Text under Semi-protection
I would replace "as well as" with "or" in the phrase "..., as well as accounts that are not ...". --195.139.144.122 (talk) 16:28, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Feedback requested at Template:Pp-vandalism
Your feedback would be appreciated at Template talk:Pp-vandalism#Proposed new param 'sandbox'. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Semiprotection
Vaunting of semiprotection is the way to wikipedia failure, censorship and forking. I mean, the use of the template {{pp-protected}} is mandatory according to Wikipedia:Rough_guide_to_semi-protection. This means that some user can express his preference to not display the padlock image by simply removing it, the better by discussing in talk page. Why was this type of edits contested as disruptive? Brainfrogk4mon (talk) 19:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- The template is there for WP:accessibility reasons. Just because you understand the reason why you cannot edit a page, doesn't mean everyone does it. The image of a padlock, which seems to be your only problem according to all your talk page comments in several places, is not a synonym of censorship, failure nor forking; if anything is a synonym of the failure of those editors that have managed to get a page protected because they can't behave there properly. Even if the padlock is hidden, the page will still be protected as they don't protect the pages, they merely indicate that a page is protected. Not using these templates, as the Spanish Wikipedia does, is a failure in itself, as it creates the presumption that a page is unprotected and anyone can edit it. And lastly, the image is so small that it cannot create loading problems as you said. The loading problems are created by the general size of the page. (CC) Tbhotch™ 20:32, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Appreciating your answer, several places consist of 2 places: talk page and VP. Anyway the image is an image and has an impact, if we consider billions of connections. The absence of Edit source already indicates you cannot edit. As well as the reason why you cannot edit a page is displayed in Page Information. The padlock is cool, but it's not symbol of freedom. Brainfrogk4mon (talk) 21:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)