UDWiki:Administration/Protections/Archive/2011 08

Shortcut:
A/PT

This page is for the request of page protection within the Urban Dead wiki. Due to philosophical concerns, the ability to protect pages is restricted to system operators. As such, regular users will need to request a protection from the system operators. For consistency and accountability, system operators also adhere to the guidelines listed here.

Guidelines for Protection Requests

All Protection Requests must contain the following information in order to be considered:

• A link to the page in question. Preferably bolded for visibility.
• A reason for protection. This should be short and to the point.
• A signed datestamp. This can be easily done by adding ~~~~ to the end of your request.

Any protection request that does not contain these three pieces of information will not be considered, and will be removed by a system operator.

Once the protection request has been entered, the request shall remain on this page, where it will be reviewed by a member of the Sysop team, and action taken accordingly. Once action has been taken, the system operator will add a comment including a signed datestamp detailing his course of action, and the request will be moved into the Recent Actions queue, where it will remain for one week. After that week is up, it may be moved to the archive (see navigation box below). If the Protection has been granted, the system operator should place the tag {{protect}} on the page(s) that have been protected.

In the event of a system operator requesting a Protection, all the previous points will apply, excepting that a system operator other than the requestor shall review and take action on the request.

Pages in the Protection Queue may already be scheduled protections. For a list of scheduled protections, see here.

Protection Queue

Place pages requiring protection here.

Requested Edits

Place requested edits here.

Recent Actions

Suburb

Hi Again. Still not sure if I'm in the right place here but when I went to look at the suburb page, I saw that the map of the suburbs was gone and replaced by the words "MY A** HURTS". Can someone please change this back to the suburb map and perhaps prevent people from deleting the whole map? Thank you? Is there a way to tell who did it? DC Lord

Edit: Oh. Hey! It's fixed!

Yeah we got him. Although you bring up a good point. Suburb is a very high profile page. It's had over3 million views. Since we no longer have a section for status updates and since it is so frequently vandalized, I'd say its prime for protection. ~ _{05:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)}

That's good. Thank you. I use that page all the time and update a lot. It's good to be able to use it and know that it won't fail. Thanks. DC Lord —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DC Lord (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Yeah reverting edits is only a couple of clicks so when some vandal messes with it we usually get it fixed pretty quickly. I'd still like to leave this open to discussion, though. I think it's time that Suburb gets protection. ~ _{19:55, 24 August 2011 (UTC)}

iirc, the only reason it wasn't protected was that there used to be a news section on the page, which people would update. Since that no longer exists, I reckon we should protect it. Hell, I'll do it now, I don't see anyone opposing this, as it's templated on.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:11, 24 August 2011 (BST)

Semi protect it. Its the kind of thing its for. --"Workshed" 21:11, 24 August 2011 (BST)

Why? No users need to edit it, and it's been messed with by users with more than 12 edits before now.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:19, 24 August 2011 (BST)

Its been messed with twice in the last year and a half by users with more than 12 edits. That's not really ample justification in my opinion. --"Workshed" 22:04, 24 August 2011 (BST)

Semi might work. There is a very rare occasion in which someone other than a sysop might want to add to Suburb. The Suburbs of Note and the More Maps sections are occasionally updated after voting/discussion. Maybe that's worth keeping it only semi-protected. ~ _{22:12, 24 August 2011 (UTC)}

Someone should really make a note about how suburbs differ in BHW and MV. --"Workshed" 22:16, 24 August 2011 (BST)

Actually for one of the wiki's most viewed pages it's pretty poorly written. ~ _{22:18, 24 August 2011 (UTC)}

It's super viewed compared to the rest of the wiki, imo: semi protect! -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 00:35, 25 August 2011 (BST)

Second only to Main Page and that's due more to it being link in the game window than anything. Yon already semi protected it but didn't move it down from requests and I'm not at a copypasta friendly device. Anyone care to move it? ~ _{01:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)}

Done. 01:50, 25 August 2011 (BST)

Yeah, I was leaving it open to teh discuzzons.-Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:53, 25 August 2011 (BST)

Under Siege Building Status Image

Hi. I might not be writing this in the right section, but I thought you guys might want to know that the UNDER SIEGE logo or picture has been tampered with or something. I was trying to update one of the buildings statuses and found the the color of the building status was black instead of orange like UNDER SIEGE should be. Could someone who knows how to, please fix it and maybe "lock" it if that is possible. Thank you. Dc Lord

No action required. You misspelled "siege". It has since been fixed. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 01:32, 14 August 2011 (BST)

Talk page archive

Full protection, please.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:59, 11 August 2011 (BST)

Got it. You know we kind of look the other way for sysop userspace stuff if you want to protect this stuff without putting in a request. ~ _{18:05, 11 August 2011 (UTC)}

I know, I just felt like sending it through the red tape.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:06, 11 August 2011 (BST)

. ~ _{18:07, 11 August 2011 (UTC)}

YOUR FACE VAPOR.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:08, 11 August 2011 (BST)

You doofus, be a rebel. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 00:25, 12 August 2011 (BST)

Arbies Stuff

• UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration Guidelines
• UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Intro

these pages no longer need to be protected, and there might by some typos there which regular users could fix without having to require it here. --hagnat 17:53, 28 July 2011 (BST)

Hagnat, as much as I'd love to unprotect them, looking at the original reason behind protection, it was so that you couldn't edit them any more. :p I feel like I'm going to have to deny this request, but I'll happily wait for a second sysop opinion.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:52, 29 July 2011 (BST)

Check the talk page, there was discussion on the subject. I wouldnt ask this page to be unprotected so i could edit it *now*... my agendas are not that long, ya know ? --hagnat 12:50, 29 July 2011 (BST)

Meh. SA said in the protection case that "ordinary users shouldn't be able to edit guidelines at any time" and I'm agreeing with him on that at the moment. Convince me otherwise.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:26, 29 July 2011 (BST)

U have a set of guidelines written by a portuguese speaking clown, prolly full of typos that any other user should be able to fix. If yer worried someome might change the guidelines, add it to your watchlist and simply revert both the edit and the protection if that happens. --hagnat 13:49, 29 July 2011 (BST)

Maybe you should use the header directly below this if you want to change an administration page guideline so badly -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 13:53, 29 July 2011 (BST)

This. There's no good reason to unprotect it. With the history of arbitration in mind, I don't like the idea of people changing it on their own the page being prone to heavy debate anyway. If you want to fix typos then just use the header below. If you actually want to change stuff like the guidelines start a discussion prior on the relevant talk page and then use the header below once you reach agreement.-- Thadeous Oakley Talk 14:08, 29 July 2011 (BST)

Haet the red tape when its not needed --hagnat 14:25, 29 July 2011 (BST)

I'd personally be for unprotecting it. The original protection seemed more of a stop-gap for a personal dispute over the phrasing of a few things. I'm pretty sure that dispute has died now and I disagree that normal users should not be able to edit this page, especially the intro. Wiki should not be that restrictive to users who simply want to improve it. ~ _{15:52, 29 July 2011 (UTC)}

FTR i'm indifferent. though if the only reason for not using #Requested Edits is "i dont like the red tape" then I'm not in a hurry to change the status quo -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 05:16, 30 July 2011 (BST)

As DDR essentially. When you have something concrete, use requested edits. If it is "just in case"/"when I get around to it", I see no reason to open an administrative text for potential vandalism and abuse. -- Spiderzed█ 13:57, 30 July 2011 (BST)

Scheduled Stuff

• UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2011 07
• UDWiki:Administration/Deletions/Archive/2011 07
• UDWiki:Administration/Speedy Deletions/Archive/2011 07
• UDWiki:Administration/Protections/Archive/2011 07
• UDWiki:Administration/Move Requests/Archive/2011 07
• UDWiki talk:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2011 07

In the end, c+p-ing was much much easier than that whole "Delete-Move-Delete-Move" stuff. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:42, 1 August 2011 (BST)

You don't actually need to list these when you cycle admin pages. ~ _{08:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)}

---

e Protections Archive

2005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2009 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Q3 Q4 2013 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Years 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019