:: wikimiki.org ::
| WikiMedia |
Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy
Semi-protection of a page prevents the newest X% of registered users and all unregistered users from editing that page.
Semi-protection will only be applied if the page in question is facing a serious vandalism problem. It is not an appropriate solution to editorial disputes of any kind since it may restrict some editors and not others. Administrators will thus apply semi-protection in the same manner as current protection against vandalism is applied — either on their own initiative or following an alert on an article's talk page, WP:RFPP, WP:AN/I or some other relevant page. Semi-protection will also only be applied as a response to serious vandalism and not as a pre-emptive measure against the threat or probability of vandalism, such as when certain pages suddenly become high profile due to current events. Only when there is evidence of a serious problem of vandalism should semi-protection be applied.
Requests to lift semi-protection should generally be unnecessary in the same way that unprotection against simple vandalism at present is generally swiftly seen to by either the protecting admin or another. Generally, a simple note to the talk page or WP:AN/I should be sufficient, but WP:RFPP can be used if necessary.
Articles that are semi-protected will be indicated with and listed at WP:PP in the same way as protections are at present.
----
Suggested template (note the links):
Note that with full protection at present, anonymous editors are prevented from editing the article in the same way as are all non-admins. This proposal does not restrict unregistered editors more than they already are in the case of protection.
Semi-protection:
- Is not a proposal to prohibit anonymous editing.
- Is not a proposal for pre-emptive protection of articles that might get vandalized.
Rationale
Many users have noticed and complained about the level of vandalism in high-profile articles, such as George W. Bush. In these frequently vandalized articles, for several hours a day, the article displays a vandalized version for the reader and editor alike. Instead of the text and images one would expect from a reputable encyclopedia, the reader discovers vulgarities and either incorrect or deliberately distasteful writing. Many of the edits to these high-profile articles are reversions of vandalism, from the most obvious blanking to the most subtle entries. Some articles, such as George W. Bush, receive few good edits; instead, they have turned into battlegrounds in which virtually every edit is either one by a vandal or one reverting vandalism. In these articles, so much time is wasted that nothing substantive can be done to improve the material or quality of information in the article. This situation tarnishes the reputation of Wikipedia and hampers the efforts of reputable editors.
The idea behind semi-protection is very simple. It works like regular protection does now, except non-admins may edit a page, provided their account is not amongst the very newest, much like with moving a page. There is one additional level of protection proposed:
:0. Open
:1. Moves Prohibited
:2. Editable only by registered users not in the newest X% of accounts
:3. Full protection (Editable only by administrators)
The barrier should be low enough that editors who wish to contribute constructively need only wait a short time (on en.wikipedia, the newest 1% of accounts last about 4 days) to be fully active.
----
Discussion at the talk page.
¶mieszne filmy cheap tickets dieta kopenhaska wagi hmb
|
|
|
|
|
