[WikiEN-l] Putting some perspective on the end of Wikipedia

[Tony Sidaway]

On 9/5/09, Risker <risker.wp at 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.