I think fully protecting templates on Main Page related articles has become the norm. See {{mprotected}} and the category linked from the template page.
-- Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu-
Luna wrote:
On 12/18/06, Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu- tariqabjotu@gmail.com wrote:
What disturbs me about the vandalism on the Main Page articles is the fact that the vandals don't appear to be drive-by vandals, but rather users who know who to use the right tags and summaries to mask their activities and inflict the most damage. Not to be the pessimist here, but we're clearly dealing with a professional vandal who knows how to beat the system. We need to take action against this person in particular, if that is possible, because once we block one avenue, (s)he'll just find another.
Along those lines, we need to remember checkuser -- they can't review and block the source, if we don't let them know which usernames to check. The usual "block and move on" mentality won't quite cut it, in this case; there's an ongoing section at RFCU about all of this, and unfortunately the checkusers can't see everything.
Rangeblocks have been slowing it down, but have not yet stopped it. We need to explore new options, including protection options for templates.
As far as templates on TFA, is there consensus as to whether they should be semi or fully protected? We're obviously dealing with somebody smart enough to start using sleeper accounts, is what I figure, but I'm not sure how much they've done so, yet.
Eh. This one is incredibly frustrating, to me.
-Luna _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l