On 10/20/07, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On 10/20/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 20/10/2007, Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/20/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Go for it.
Grumble. I probably shouldn't, only make the situation more heated... besides, does anyone who isn't a wikipedian really care... grumble..... fine, it's in the Firehose!
I actually suspect that "Wikipedia is very tolerant, but doesn't put up with rubbish forever" will find favour with the general public.
As would "Wikipedia abandons open editing", probably.
This is far from the first article to be protected.
I do not hope or expect this to in any way be "permanent". But I do not intend to turn it of in (a week, a month, etc). There are large issues here with extremely persistent extemely abusive organized external groups. The first Arbcom case on this topic was 3 plus years ago, with 3 more since including the proposed one being reviewed for acceptance now. There has been at least one blocked user who's sockpuppeted fairly continuously for years on the topic.
If that is not tedentious extended edit warring, I do not know what is.
As David Gerard mentions on ANI, the Flagged Revisions software upgrade may render this unnecessary, or other policy or operational changes could have the same effect.
As I noted on ANI - the article is not frozen. Any administrator can still edit it during the protection. If there are legitimate concerns or improvements desired, they can be discussed and justified on the talk page, and made live by any admin.