UDWiki:Administration/Protections/Archive/2011 06

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. 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.

Protection Queue

Place pages requiring protection here.

Requested Edits

Place protected pages requiring edits here.

Recent Actions

User:Blasto

Remove the category from this page, the stupy one.--xoxo 10:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Category removed. It was a stupy category anyway. --ZsL 18:59, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Oct '08 A/SD & A/D

Page protected due to edit war. It will be unlocked tomorrow or something, when this shitstorm subsides. --ZsL 08:29, 24 October 2008 (BST)

You missed A/D, which is also coming under fire. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:30, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Yeah you would probably want to get that before it comes under fire. Just a heads up.--CyberRead240 08:31, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Protect A/D with the stuff currently on A/SD on it as is wiki policy or i will A/M you.--xoxo 08:31, 24 October 2008 (BST)

LOL --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:32, 24 October 2008 (BST)

but srs :| --Nallan (Talk) 08:33, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I put the stuff from A/SD on A/D and protected it. Is the shortened version w/ the just the keeps fine? --ZsL 08:37, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Should be. The other stuff is kinda irrelevant. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:39, 24 October 2008 (BST)

How's it taste, bob? The ass I mean.--Nallan (Talk) 08:54, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Can't be as bad as all that bitterness. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:56, 24 October 2008 (BST)

What a brilliant idea(!) Block a community page so maintenance can't be done. Genius fucking idea. Request immediate unprotection for obvious reasons. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 08:56, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Is your need so pressing that you can't wait a few minutes for the request in question to be processed? Quitcher bitching. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:57, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Yeah! What he said!--Nallan (Talk) 09:02, 24 October 2008 (BST)

STFU the lot of you. I'd have ruled you all persistent vandals and temp blocked you for an hour, allowing the community to use their own resources. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 09:03, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Cry some more. The last time a sysop tried to pull a block like that they got Misconduct'd. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 09:04, 24 October 2008 (BST)

After looking at A/D's talk page, I'll unprotect A/D so the community can resume voting on the articles up for deletion. I'll also unprotect A/SD too, but please don't put up any username redirects for deletion for a while. Alright? --ZsL 17:43, 24 October 2008 (BST)

More border-radius

This one unrelated to the template. I ask that you change the radii for the "Voting Rules" cell in Template:SugVoteBox, and the "Voting Rules" and "Today's Suggestions" cells in Template:SugVoteRules all to 6px. The current 12px is too big and doesn't work on Chrome or Safari. I assume this is because the cell itself is less than 24 pixels tall. Changing them to 6px fixed it (tried it in my sandbox), and 6px is also used for the inner radius in Template:Navigation. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 18:23, 22 October 2008 (BST)

Ok, Karek did this and the pages are now working properly so I'm moving this down. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 21:45, 23 October 2008 (BST)

border-radius

I request that the vendor specific -*-border-radius styles be replaced with {{border-radius}} in the following pages. Or alternatively, unprotect them temporarily so that I can do the editing.

• Main Page
• Template:Navigation
• Template:SugVoteBox
• Template:SugVoteRules

If you know any other protected pages that have rounded edges, I ask you to also edit them. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 19:41, 15 October 2008 (BST)

Ok. I think I've done that right. Can you take a quick check and let me know if I need to sort any part? -- Cheese 19:48, 15 October 2008 (BST)

Sorry, I should've been more specific about it. You were supposed to put the width as an argument to the template, as in {{border-radius|NNpx}}. And you were supposed to put only one if there were styles both for -moz- and -webkit-. Also, you missed at least one on Main Page. :P --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 19:54, 15 October 2008 (BST)

And you left the -moz- styles on Main Page. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 19:59, 15 October 2008 (BST)

Think I got it now. =p -- Cheese 20:05, 15 October 2008 (BST)

Looks like you did :). --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 20:09, 15 October 2008 (BST)

No Don't make me undo a bunch of edits because apparently know one knows anything about CSS and web-browsers. Although my guess is I'm late to the party and you've probably removed all the -moz- -webkit-s which made them work on safari/FF 2/1.--Karek^maps?! 05:14, 16 October 2008 (BST)

I've added the CSS3 support code but right now it's just taking up space as the only browsers worth mentioning that support CSS3 run webkit/mozilla. It's dead code until IE decides to support CSS3, which probably won't happen until CSS4 is almost done if you use their history as a guide.--Karek^maps?! 05:24, 16 October 2008 (BST)

Oh for fucks sake... did you even test it? The css code inside the template, which has both -moz- and -webkit- styles (among others), gets included straight into the style attribute, which on the client-side is exactly the same as having the separate -moz- and -webkit- styles there. To the browser, there is no difference what-so-ever. The whole point of the template is to get all of the different vendor-specific code in one call, and if some other browser comes up, only one template needs to be changed to get all of the elements that have rounded corners work on it. How about you learn about how wikis, browsers and css work before complaining to others? --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 11:14, 16 October 2008 (BST)

Now, it seems like Karek just looked at the name of the template and assumed that it only contains the CSS3 border-radius property and acted without looking inside the template to see what it actually contains, which is: -moz-border-radius:{{{1}}}; -webkit-border-radius:{{{1}}}; -opera-border-radius:{{{1}}}; -o-border-radius:{{{1}}}; -khtml-border-radius:{{{1}}}; border-radius:{{{1}}};. I ask that you put the template calls back where Cheese put them as it supports more browsers than what Karek put there, not less as he claimed in his edit summary. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 18:12, 16 October 2008 (BST)

No, I looked at the fact it was a template call and would have removed it anyway. Don't make unneeded template calls it puts more stress on the server and limits inclusions. Not to mention you make the argument for why none of that extra junk is needed in the border radius template itself " Konqueror (and other KHTML-based browsers) and Opera (though only older versions as they seem to have removed support for it)." Konqueror doesn't even count for .5% of browsers used and according to you Opera doesn't even support your code.--Karek^maps?! 02:57, 17 October 2008 (BST)

So what if KHTML accounts only .5% of browsers? The game supports it so why shouldn't the wiki? Chrome and Safari account to less than 7%, so why don't we also dump the -webkit-s? Hell, 72% of the internet is browsed through IE so why don't we dump rounded corners altogether since IE doesn't support them? The couple of template calls this would add to a page are not going to be the ones that break it. If you want to complain about excess templates, go complain to those who use templated signatures. Templated sigs are orders of magnitude worse a problem than this. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 07:27, 17 October 2008 (BST)

The reason is that KHTML is also the browser set that has the most CSS3 support. It would be ridiculously redundant to have both exceptions when the likeliness of running into a user that has an outdated version of Konqueror is statistically nonexistant. And side point, IE hasn't had 72% market share since Netscape tanked years ago, Firefox has nearly 40% now. Safari and Chrome are far more significant as far as support goes because Webkit isn't browser exclusive has been a significant browser for at least a few years now. There is a point where you have to draw the line when it comes to code viability and this is roughly it, if you can find an opera code that doesn't seem to have been disabled purposely by the code devs then it should be added, but stop trying to have useless things added because you are touchy about your code being criticized.--Karek^maps?! 15:23, 17 October 2008 (BST)

Now, I wouldn't object to removing the Opera ones since I didn't know they were no longer supported when I first put them there. But no, you didn't even suggest that. If KHTML actually does support the CSS3 border-radius property (which it, to my knowledge, doesn't), I'd be happy to remove that too as most people who use it are the kind of people who stay up-to-date on software.

This isn't about my code being criticized. This is about the fact that this is the simplest and easiest way to include support for all of the browsers, in all the templates on the wiki that use round edges, now and in the future. As opposed to manually writing all of the vendor-specific code and updating each and every template individually if something changes in the future. This is about the fact that using {{border-radius}} is not going to add significantly to breaking pages, or the load of the server. As opposed to the hundreds of templated signatures on any page which is even remotely in the danger of breaking because of templates (and most templated signatures have many times the amount of code this template has). Look at Talk:Suggestions, which is pretty much the only page with the risk of breaking because of templates. It's got 12 suggestions on it right now, which is much less than half of what it needs before it breaks. There's currently about 80 template calls on that page. Then there's the suggestion navigation which uses rounded corners in two places. {{border-radius}} currently amounts to less than 3% of the page's template calls, and would amount to about 1% at the point where the page actually breaks. KHTML isn't the only thing that's "statistically nonexistant". --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 17:27, 17 October 2008 (BST)

Actually, I wouldn't even mind it being left off Main Page and Template:Navigation, as Main Page does get a considerable amount of traffic, and the {{border-radius}} calls would form about half of all the template calls from that page. It could very well have an effect on that page. However, Template:SugVoteBox and Template:SugVoteRules are only used on the suggestion pages which aren't that high-traffic, and they most often have a bunch of templated signatures on them which leaves the {{border-radius}} calls into a clear minority. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 17:51, 17 October 2008 (BST)

Threatening me with arbitration because you can't take the time to research your point to make a convincing and informed argument is just going to make me close this as served. You've gotten what you needed out of the requested edit, you're not getting your template call just because you convinced a sysop who doesn't know enough about the subject to know better. This is done, the request has been served, the discussion ended 5 indents up. You want a chance at getting your way find another user that agrees with you and knows enough to be a part of the discussion because I can assure you you won't be getting it through arbitration without that.--Karek^maps?! 19:05, 21 October 2008 (BST)

You're the one who's lacking in convincing arguments, resorting into pure speculation about my motivations. Which is why I suggested we take this to arbitration and let a third party decide whose arguments are more convincing. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 19:28, 21 October 2008 (BST)

Withdrawn Policy

Withdrawn policy, no longer under vote, requires protection. Should have been done by the author. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 02:23, 19 October 2008 (BST)

Done.--Karek^maps?! 07:22, 19 October 2008 (BST)

Template:border-radius

I doubt it needs to be changed any time in the near future. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 18:15, 16 October 2008 (BST)

Done.--Karek^maps?! 07:22, 19 October 2008 (BST)

Template:SugVoteRules

Ive just head a vote struck http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Suggestion:20080814_Give_Ruin_Age_in_ExMilReps&diff=1262004&oldid=1261191

because ive always read point 5.

"It is strongly recommended that voters (especially in the kill/spam sections) justify their vote to help others understand the reason they disagree. Feedback helps new suggesters get a feel for what the community does and does not want included in Urban Dead, and a deeper understanding of the balance needed for a workable suggestion. "

And now i see at the bottom of the page

"Votes that do not have reasoning behind them are invalid. You MUST justify your vote."

Yet even further below, in the examples

"Keep - Best. Suggestion. Evar. --Bob_Zombie 04:01, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT)"

Can we have someting a bit less contradictory? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 12:42, 31 August 2008 (BST)

I'm not really sure if we're going with "recommended" or "required", but the example is justified, just generic and unhelpful. Bob Zombie is voting keep because he thinks it's the best suggestion evar. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:22, 31 August 2008 (BST)

Fair enough, I thought my vote was generic and unhelpful, yet justified. Also notice that you've got at least one header that includes the word advice. Its not advice, its the only acceptable way of doing things. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 23:57, 31 August 2008 (BST)

I think Ross's saying our sample vote should have correct punctuation. Also, ZS just go fix this shit up. It should def be non contradictory. I'd go with making them both strongly recommended, less arguments that one and if someone feels strongly they can propose the change.--xoxo 04:46, 16 October 2008 (BST)

Agreed, the two templates need aligning. As people have had votes struck for non justification, this template should be altered accordingly. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 00:12, 1 September 2008 (BST)

Alright, if anyone has any suggestions on what they want the text to be altered to... --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:01, 2 September 2008 (BST)

Give us a day and ill post some ideas. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:54, 2 September 2008 (BST)

This seems to have died a while ago, so I'll just leave the page as-is. --ZsL 23:57, 14 October 2008 (BST)

UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning

Request unprotection. Didn't we go over this when Karek protected it? If the page is protected, the edit links vanish for regular users and it looks like the whole page is protected. Not nice for those less versed in the ways of the wiki. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 19:00, 14 October 2008 (BST)

Didn't see that one. :S My bad. Unprotected. -- Cheese 19:12, 14 October 2008 (BST)

My User Pages

Hai there. I need someone to unprotect my sub-junks. Or to give me sysop powers again... either way is fine for me --People's Commissar Hagnat ^talk 15:45, 14 October 2008 (BST)

First one done, unless I missed something. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 21:46, 14 October 2008 (BST)

Promotions

Even though it's my version that's been protected, closing that page to edits is counter-productive. How should the community vote when they can't edit? Request unprotection. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 23:21, 9 October 2008 (BST)

I agree, but the only other option was banning you. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:23, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Lol. =P -- Cheese 23:23, 9 October 2008 (BST)

I've protected this temporarily because of an edit war between myself, Iscariot, Cheese and some other users. I have not reverted Iscariots edits. Please resolve this conflict on the talk page and unprotect this in about an hour, I have to go. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:22, 9 October 2008 (BST)

I believe I am in the right, as obviously illustrated. Am talking with Cheese on IRL and he believes he is right. There is no bad faith, just different interpretations. What I'd forward is the simple logic that leaving the section up there in no way harms anything. In a couple of days the new misconduct case will be completed, Grim will be found guilty and his sysop status revoked. At this time he can and should be removed. Until that point removing it looks like sysops are trying to influence a community vote, after what's happened we need to be seeing an image of the sysops that is completely free of the possibility of accusation. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 23:29, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Fucking unblock that shit now. If this is about grim being on that page then whoever is trying to keep him on it is being rediculous. He is NOT a sysop and thus cannot stand for a crat election. Simple as. If i'm totally wrong about this, apologies as i'm too shitty at you protecting it over something so pathetic to read up properly :P Now unblock now or i'm taking you all to A/M, except Iscariot. --xoxo 23:27, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Done. :P I've got Iscariot distracted on IRC. Quick!! Steal his cat!! -- Cheese 23:29, 9 October 2008 (BST)

thankyou, now i can post amusing witticisms in response to other people's votes. --xoxo 23:31, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Unless I'm handed a vandalism warning in the meantime, I'll be putting it all back in tomorrow at work. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 23:32, 9 October 2008 (BST)

You won't, no matter how ridiculous edit wars get a/a not a/vb. gah. --xoxo 23:38, 9 October 2008 (BST)

User:SirArgo/Signature

I would like for my signature page to be unprotected. It's about time I updated my signature and made it useful!--SirArgo ^Talk 21:07, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Also done -- Cheese 21:13, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Namespace pages

User:Grim_s/Suggestions

User:Grim_s/Events

User:Grim_s/Sandbox

User:Grim_s/Sandbox/Testplate/Archive

User:Grim_s/Grims_guide_to_staying_alive

User:Grim_s/Kills

and all associated talk/discussion pages.

User is perma banned, and these pages should be protected as per standard practice to prevent vandalism and retaliation. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 11:17, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Apologies if I sound like a jerk, but hes still a sysop according to This page. Could you please show some confirmation of bannage please? Linkthewindow ^Talk

11:29, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Whoops, my bad. Guess hes banned. Heres the ban log if anyone wants proof. Sorry for the inconvenience. Linkthewindow ^Talk 11:30, 9 October 2008 (BST)

He banned himself. But given his sysop status, he can unban himself at any time. It is possible that he will return, so I'll leave these unprotected for now. They're not likely to be vandalised without anyone noticing for a while -- boxy ^{talk • i} 11:32 9 October 2008 (BST)

Ok, thanks for the confirmation. Linkthewindow ^Talk 11:42, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Given that the current Misconduct case is likely to strip him of that status, and he can unprotect them and edit them easily if he decides to unban himself, I'd still prefer these protecting to save them from any recriminations from trolls when the majority of the community wakes up. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 11:46, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Yeah, protect his user page as that will be a prime target for trolls, IMO. However, the community does deserve their voice so protecting his talk page will just make people more annoyed. I'm gonna imagine that this wiki will be nightmarish when I wake up (and when my US comrades are on their interwebs.) Linkthewindow ^Talk 13:07, 9 October 2008 (BST)

His user page is already protected. It is standard practice to protect the talk page of anyone who has been banned to prevent drama and retaliation. I added the others to pro-actively prevent vandalism. I know of no good reason why these have not already been protected. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 13:09, 9 October 2008 (BST)

I knew it would happen.... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:49, 9 October 2008 (BST)

It's now open season. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:00, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Done. -- Cheese 21:12, 9 October 2008 (BST)

User:Midianian/Archives/Talk/2007-2008

Change the User:Midianian/Greasemonkey link to User:Midianian/Userscripts in my last comment in the GM Scripts section. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 15:29, 29 September 2008 (BST)

Done. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:00, 29 September 2008 (BST)

User:Cyberbob240/Sig

unprotect plox --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 10:34, 26 September 2008 (BST)

Mmmm, be nice now, Bob -- boxy ^{talk • i} 10:56 26 September 2008 (BST)

lolwut --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 18:21, 26 September 2008 (BST)

Southall Mansion

Requesting page protection as per this edit as my version is the one agreed by multiple group consensus. This will avert an edit war and encourage the arbitration process that has already begun. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 07:21, 26 September 2008 (BST)

Done -- boxy ^{talk • i} 09:49 26 September 2008 (BST)

UZM

Please add the (delete) template to this page, as a formal deletion request has been submitted. Thanks. --WanYao 18:55, 22 September 2008 (BST)

Cheese. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 19:46, 22 September 2008 (BST)

UZM

Until the status of this page can somehow be decided upon, I am requesting that UZM be protected to stop the ongoing edit war. I also request that this edit be the version used -- because it is the most recent edit which was not decided upon unilaterally by zeug. Thanks. --WanYao 17:18, 22 September 2008 (BST)

Cheesy did it. I think that's a record for the most undos in that short period of time.... --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:28, 22 September 2008 (BST)

Since the history purge anyway. :P -- Cheese 18:38, 22 September 2008 (BST

Protections Scheduling Queue

Protection Scheduling requests should be requested in the same general format as Deletions. Votes will occur in the same general manner, and like deletion scheduling requests will be voted on for two (2) weeks, as judged by the initial datestamp. Valid votes are:

• Yea - Approval of Schedule Request
• Nay - Disapproval of Schedule Request

Finished Arby Cases

With the new arbitration format, we'll need to protect the pages once the case is closed. Just so we can protect them if someone's forgot to put in a request for us to do so. -- Cheese

• Yea - I'm not sure if this is covered by the archive thingy below since it's a new format. -- Cheese 12:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
• Yea - i was about to ask this kind of pages to be added to the protection schedule, lol --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 12:57, 31 March 2008 (BST)

  Well thats been over a month and there have been no objections so I'll stick this as scheduled. -- Cheese 23:37, 7 May 2008 (BST)

  When the hell did this go up and why would you not actually check to see that it is already scheduled before proposing it?--Karek^maps?! 05:37, 8 May 2008 (BST)

  End of March...and where? -- Cheese 23:49, 13 May 2008 (BST)

  See below --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 00:06, 14 May 2008 (BST)

  UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Archivewhateva. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:29, 14 May 2008 (BST)