384,326
edits
MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/37: Difference between revisions
m
Robot: Automated text replacement (-plainlink +plain link)
mNo edit summary |
m (Robot: Automated text replacement (-plainlink +plain link)) |
||
| Line 419: | Line 419: | ||
====Comments==== | ====Comments==== | ||
<s>Mixed feelings on this.</s> I haven't seen many galleries targeted by persistent vandals (though that's just personal experience speaking), and in the event such vandalism exists (which it likely does) it's far less frequent then 'attacks' targeting the main page itself. @WooftheChomp, admirable as that sentiment is, a typo is just that: a minor misspelling that someone is due to notice at some point and fix. If the anon's so intent on having it fixed, they could just inform another user or something (since I'm assuming semi-protection also prevents new and unconfirmed users editing the page). [[User:Lord Grammaticus|Lord Grammaticus]] ([[User talk:Lord Grammaticus|talk]]) 13:13, 3 January 2014 (EST) | <s>Mixed feelings on this.</s> I haven't seen many galleries targeted by persistent vandals (though that's just personal experience speaking), and in the event such vandalism exists (which it likely does) it's far less frequent then 'attacks' targeting the main page itself. @WooftheChomp, admirable as that sentiment is, a typo is just that: a minor misspelling that someone is due to notice at some point and fix. If the anon's so intent on having it fixed, they could just inform another user or something (since I'm assuming semi-protection also prevents new and unconfirmed users editing the page). [[User:Lord Grammaticus|Lord Grammaticus]] ([[User talk:Lord Grammaticus|talk]]) 13:13, 3 January 2014 (EST) | ||
:@Yoshi876 Yeah, but what about the reason the {{ | :@Yoshi876 Yeah, but what about the reason the {{plain link|1=[http://www.mariowiki.com/MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive_34#Semi-protect_Glitch_List_pages glitch pages are semi-protected?]}} While those are a good source, they've also been under heavy vandalism. While I'm not saying that every popular page should be protected to stop vandals, at least the really important ones should. {{user|driftmaster130}} | ||
::Whilst yes they were protected to stop vandalism, it's a bit harder to decide whether certain edits on a glitch page are bad. I could go along and write a perfectly detailed glitch, but make it up. If someone tries it you can just say they didn't do it correctly. {{User|Yoshi876}} | ::Whilst yes they were protected to stop vandalism, it's a bit harder to decide whether certain edits on a glitch page are bad. I could go along and write a perfectly detailed glitch, but make it up. If someone tries it you can just say they didn't do it correctly. {{User|Yoshi876}} | ||
:::Adding to what you said, If I were a vandal, I wouldn't make an account and make 5 edits and wait for 4 days so I can just add a fake glitch. The fact that the Mario article is protected, is mostly because it likes the main cover of our wiki. You know the first page you visit is mostly Mario, you can't find vandalism there.. it just won't be nice :P {{User|Megadardery}} | :::Adding to what you said, If I were a vandal, I wouldn't make an account and make 5 edits and wait for 4 days so I can just add a fake glitch. The fact that the Mario article is protected, is mostly because it likes the main cover of our wiki. You know the first page you visit is mostly Mario, you can't find vandalism there.. it just won't be nice :P {{User|Megadardery}} | ||