On 9/5/09, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
There are some opportunities to improve practices here, and to really take a look and decide which articles (and rarely, article talk pages) need this indefinite protection. At the same time, I really do believe that if an admin is going to reduce protection on a page with an extensive history of problems, he or she has a responsibility to keep an eye on the page for at least a couple of weeks afterward to ensure there isn't a fresh outbreak of inappropriate behaviour. Since so many of the articles involved are BLPs, and even on non-BLPs the problems were related to inappropriate addition of information about LPs, this is an area where special sensitivity is required.
I've done a tiny bit of work by examining some 60 semiprotected pages in article-space, most of which turned out to be redirects. There are some obvious articles to keep semiprotected: those that are magnets for vandalism by their nature, those that have been protected under an OTRS ticket, and those that are known to be targeted for long term abuse.
Of the remainder, I've initiated reviews of 9 semiprotected articles, contacting the protecting admin and starting a discussion on the article talk page. One review has been completed with the decision to retain semiprotection because the vandal is known to be still around and unblockable because of dynamic IP issues.