UDWiki:Administration/Protections/Archive/2011 06: Difference between revisions
The Rooster (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
Okay cool. Unprotected then. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 23:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC) | Okay cool. Unprotected then. --{{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig3}} 23:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
Minor note: I deleted the old revisions and let the author re-upload to prevent uninformed reverts. {{User:The_Rooster/Sig}} 02:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
===Policies=== | ===Policies=== |
Revision as of 02:04, 14 January 2010
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.
Protections Archive | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Protection Queue
Place pages requiring protection here.
Requested Edits
Place pages requiring editing here.
Recent Actions
A/VD
Under the Formalisation heading, where it says, "This applies to all entires as of 12 January 2010," entires should be entries instead. Also, how about "must include a link" instead of "are now to be formalised with a link"? Seems less awkward. —Aichon— 15:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Data, not A/VD. :P --Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 22:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Fixed --
23:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
A/DE
Done as per the other Admin redirects. --
13:10, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Image:Banner Illuminati2.JPG
Due to some sort of upload-war I've temporarily protected it to the original authors' version before the conflict broke out. he's specified that he doesn't want Hal messing with it as of now, a discussion here as to how and why the dispute has happened could help me understand what's going on. --
13:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Hey sorry I did not realize that our image template page was being monitored, It was a friendly joking war, we are teammates and hunting buds but as a group we are having trouble coming to a consensus on a group image.. sorry for the misunderstanding I am sure it did appear unfriendly to outside eyes and I appreciate the speed at which you intervened. I just want to also make sure that you know Hal did nothing wrong he is a great guy and he loves cheese. ;) thanks again and sorry for the misunderstanding Divs 14:10, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Okay cool. Unprotected then. --
23:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Minor note: I deleted the old revisions and let the author re-upload to prevent uninformed reverts. -- RoosterDragon 02:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Policies
I'm sure UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Better Vandal Data and UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/English Administration are both scheduled, you know I'd do it myself but I really don't have the time right now nor will I in the coming few days... Obviously the former (or the relevant parts) will need to be put in Approved and the necessary changes made before this queue can be completed, etc. --
13:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sigh. Done myself :/ thanks, other ops -- 11:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
The Following Talk Page
I would appreciate it if [this] could be protected. -Poodle of DoomM! T 17:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah done. -- 02:15, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
This Withdrawn Policy
I see no need to make an entirely new page for what will be the exact same policy. Please unprotect so the three days of discussion can start and I can actually take it to voting this time.-- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 15:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- Also, remove it from withdrawn. It's going to be put to voting this time in some way, shape, or form.-- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 15:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- DONE MOTHER BITCHES 16:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- NO YOU DUMB BITCH, YOU FORGOT THE TALK PAGE!--Thadeous Oakley 16:17, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
- DONE MOTHER BITCHES 16:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
UDWiki:Administration/Bureaucrat Promotions/December 2009
This thing and its corresponding talk page require protection. --ZsL 00:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- Done. -- 00:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
The Following Talk Page...
I would like to see this this protected if possable please. -Poodle of DoomM! T 00:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- Done. -- 00:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Zombie Lord vs Bob Boberton
Scheduled. Although it should be left for a little while for comments, I don't think there's really any need, seeing as all involved parties know about the ruling. Protect as and when you feel it's right.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 23:22, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- I was waiting for ZL to concur but since he's expressed he knows about it I've done it. -- 02:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Recruitment talk archives
Linkthewindow Talk 10:32, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
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
Note: The archive for Scheduled Protections can be found here.