[WikiEN-l] More concerns about wide scale article protection

[Erica]

I believe there are 2 points to consider, one that's pretty easy to
fix, and another of a more philosophical matter:

1. The fact that there are currently too many protected and
semi-protected articles. I've been going through these and
unprotecting those that had been protected for too long. If there was
no discussion on the talk page, or I just figured it was time for
unprotecting, I did so. Most of them appear to be just fine--no
instant vandalism or edit wars. Yesterday I unprotected an article
that had been fully protected since *October*.. le sigh. Hopefully,
with the protection end-date feature, that will never happen again.

2. The indefinite semi-protection of some articles. I think everyone
would rather we never had to protect/sprotect anything. However some
articles are more attractive targets than others. After I unprotected
[[Bill Cosby]], for instance, it was instantly vandalised multiple
times, as was [[Black Death]] (which I finally just re-semi-protected
out of exasperation). I would rather that no pages were protected for
long periods of time, but vandalism does not just happen *anywhere* --
I believe many vandals will type in the first thing they think of and
vandalize that. If they are unable to vandalize, a certain percentage
will think "oh, that sucks" and move on to some other non-wiki
activity.

My two cents,

Erica
User:Fang Aili


On 3/29/07, bobolozo <bobolozo at yahoo.com> wrote:
> [[Special:Statistics]] has a list of the top 100 most
> viewed articles on en.Wikipedia.
>
> 9 of the top 10, and 15 of the top 20 articles, are
> currently semi-protected.  Of the 5 that aren't, 2
> have been sprotected for major portions of the last
> month, 2 for short portions of the last month, and
> only one has never been protected.
>
> In addition, pick most any highly notable subject, and
> you'll find the article is sprotected.  God, Satan,
> Islam, Buddhism, United States, and so on.  Any major
> topic you look at, if they're not protected currently,
> they have been recently.
>
> We seem to be sliding towards a policy of
> semi-protecting all high traffic articles.

<snip>