Please consider my request at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/ Developer_help_needed#Open_requests
Fred
Fred Bauder wrote:
Please consider my request at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Developer_he...
Are you referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Semi-protection_policy ?
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Not really, but I think a lot of us are casting about for some alternatives. I am looking at it as a possible arbitration committee remedy. I like the coding even if semi-protection is rejected as a policy. We have certain situations we can't solve in a reasonable way. Making the editing by administrators only is way too restrictive, leaving it open to the unlimited unblockable sockpuppets some folks are willing to employ is just nonsense when there is a history of months of senseless edit warring.
Fred
On Dec 19, 2005, at 1:20 PM, Brion Vibber wrote:
Fred Bauder wrote:
Please consider my request at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/ Developer_help_needed#Open_requests
Are you referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Semi- protection_policy ?
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I looked at partial protection. It is the same thing although I had not been aware of it. I want the coding so we can use it as a possible arbitration committee remedy. I haven't thought through the proposed policy and don't know if it is a good idea or not, but the arbitration committee needs it.
Fred
On Dec 19, 2005, at 2:28 PM, Brion Vibber wrote:
Fred Bauder wrote:
Not really, but I think a lot of us are casting about for some alternatives. I am looking at it as a possible arbitration committee remedy.
In that case I have no idea what you're talking about.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 12/20/05, Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com wrote:
Fred Bauder wrote:
Not really, but I think a lot of us are casting about for some alternatives. I am looking at it as a possible arbitration committee remedy.
In that case I have no idea what you're talking about.
I think what he means is creating a new user group (maybe called "trusted" or something) which has privileges to edit some articles which have been protected. There would also need to be more levels of protection, so admin-only, admin-and-trusted, unprotected. Is this what you mean?
-- Stephen Bain stephen.bain@gmail.com
Right.
Fred
On Dec 19, 2005, at 2:51 PM, Stephen Bain wrote:
On 12/20/05, Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com wrote:
Fred Bauder wrote:
Not really, but I think a lot of us are casting about for some alternatives. I am looking at it as a possible arbitration committee remedy.
In that case I have no idea what you're talking about.
I think what he means is creating a new user group (maybe called "trusted" or something) which has privileges to edit some articles which have been protected. There would also need to be more levels of protection, so admin-only, admin-and-trusted, unprotected. Is this what you mean?
-- Stephen Bain stephen.bain@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
But yes they seem to have agreed on semi-protection on that page. Please implement that coding. We will use it in a different way, but the coding is the same.
Fred
On Dec 19, 2005, at 2:28 PM, Brion Vibber wrote:
Fred Bauder wrote:
Not really, but I think a lot of us are casting about for some alternatives. I am looking at it as a possible arbitration committee remedy.
In that case I have no idea what you're talking about.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org