On 12/18/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:49:11 +0100, "MacGyverMagic/Mgm" macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Since when is something getting tedious for admins a reason not to do it? If it's a mainpage non-article vandal target, it should be protected - no exceptions.
The obvious is never a problem, as my dad always says.
Guy (JzG)
I have to agree. I saw a certain penis image when I logged on the other day and it gave me quite a start. I haven't seen that kind of thing in a while. As long as the article itself get protected, we shouldn't beat around the bush as to what to protect or not to protect. If a template has to get subst'd I guess that is fine too. Better we have messy code that people can't see right away than shock images that they can.
--Ryan