Editing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Extended confirmed protection policy
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:spa|username}} ; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}} . |
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 462: | Line 462: | ||
::::*I've actually reviewed PC2 more recently and don't think I'd support it anymore in its current form. I was unclear on what exactly PC2 was when I previously gave my opinion, and I'm now concerned that the reviewer user right wasn't granted to reviewers with the intent for them to serve as basically respondents to fully-protected edit requests. I'd only support PC2 if we separated out the reviewer PC1 and reviewer PC2 user rights (with the PC2 needing to be requested by current reviewers). Specifically, any editor with a history of edit warring should not be able to review PC2 revisions for obvious reasons, but we've never had cause to heavily consider that when granting that flag up until now. ~ [[User:BU Rob13|<b>Rob</b><small><sub>13</sub></small>]]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">[[User talk:BU Rob13|Talk]]</sup> 00:42, 2 August 2016 (UTC) |
::::*I've actually reviewed PC2 more recently and don't think I'd support it anymore in its current form. I was unclear on what exactly PC2 was when I previously gave my opinion, and I'm now concerned that the reviewer user right wasn't granted to reviewers with the intent for them to serve as basically respondents to fully-protected edit requests. I'd only support PC2 if we separated out the reviewer PC1 and reviewer PC2 user rights (with the PC2 needing to be requested by current reviewers). Specifically, any editor with a history of edit warring should not be able to review PC2 revisions for obvious reasons, but we've never had cause to heavily consider that when granting that flag up until now. ~ [[User:BU Rob13|<b>Rob</b><small><sub>13</sub></small>]]<sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">[[User talk:BU Rob13|Talk]]</sup> 00:42, 2 August 2016 (UTC) |
||
::::::As far as I'm concerned, PC2 + semi should be available right now as an option for pages subject to extreme disruption. And yet... here we are. Even if PC2 were available, however, 30/500 would be valuable as another tool in the chest. Pages that would otherwise be subject to full protection might benefit from PC2 + 30/500 simultaneously. [[User:DavidLeighEllis|DavidLeighEllis]] ([[User talk:DavidLeighEllis|talk]]) 02:44, 9 August 2016 (UTC) |
::::::As far as I'm concerned, PC2 + semi should be available right now as an option for pages subject to extreme disruption. And yet... here we are. Even if PC2 were available, however, 30/500 would be valuable as another tool in the chest. Pages that would otherwise be subject to full protection might benefit from PC2 + 30/500 simultaneously. [[User:DavidLeighEllis|DavidLeighEllis]] ([[User talk:DavidLeighEllis|talk]]) 02:44, 9 August 2016 (UTC) |
||
:::::::By the way, extended full protection of articles due to extreme disruption is not a hypothetical. Right now, we have [[List of social networking websites]], [[Syed Mohsin Nawab Rizvi]], and [[Mass killings under Communist regimes]] under ''indefinite'' full protection, with no apparent end in sight. These are exactly the sort of situations in which PC2 + 30/500 might prove useful. [[User:DavidLeighEllis|DavidLeighEllis]] ([[User talk:DavidLeighEllis|talk]]) 02:54, 9 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
===Bots (bug)=== |
===Bots (bug)=== |