User talk:Mad Hunter: Difference between revisions
TheDarkStar (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Mad Hunter (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
:Except in said overreaction, you missed that it wasn't an archive page you edited ([[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive|which we have several of, already maintained by regular uses and admins alike]]), but an older revision of the current page. Locking either page would have been pointlessly obstructive, especially when the simpler solution is to pay a bit more mind to what you're editing. --{{User:Lord Grammaticus/sig}} 09:36, October 23, 2019 (EDT) | :Except in said overreaction, you missed that it wasn't an archive page you edited ([[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive|which we have several of, already maintained by regular uses and admins alike]]), but an older revision of the current page. Locking either page would have been pointlessly obstructive, especially when the simpler solution is to pay a bit more mind to what you're editing. --{{User:Lord Grammaticus/sig}} 09:36, October 23, 2019 (EDT) | ||
::Also, the main proposal archives are already full-protected (except the current one, archive 54). I do agree that, since protecting only old revisions is impossible, fully protecting the proposal page would inevitably end up completely destroying the point of a proposal (why even have a proposal on the main proposals page when only admins can vote anyway?). {{User:TheDarkStar/sig}} 10:05, October 23, 2019 (EDT) | ::Also, the main proposal archives are already full-protected (except the current one, archive 54). I do agree that, since protecting only old revisions is impossible, fully protecting the proposal page would inevitably end up completely destroying the point of a proposal (why even have a proposal on the main proposals page when only admins can vote anyway?). {{User:TheDarkStar/sig}} 10:05, October 23, 2019 (EDT) | ||
Huh. How was I even able to edit that anyway if the archives were protected? [[User:Mad Hunter|Mad Hunter]] ([[User talk:Mad Hunter|talk]]) 10:10, October 23, 2019 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 10:10, October 23, 2019
RE: Thanks for fixing that!
I just replaced the quote template with a similar one, {{quote2}}. This allows pipe linking (as in, linking to a page while displaying something different) and additional descriptions. 
12:15, September 26, 2019 (EDT)
Special:Diff/2780293
What was that vandalism for? --
FanOfYoshi 12:22, October 13, 2019 (EDT)
What vandalism? Did I do something? If I did, I guess roll it back, but I dont know what you're talking about. Mad Hunter (talk) 16:32, October 13, 2019 (EDT)
Ohh… I Have no idea about that. I didn't do that, I swear! Why would I? Mad Hunter (talk) 16:36, October 13, 2019 (EDT)
- As should be clear by now, Hunter simply made a mistake - though they did also overreact with their proposal right after, the fact remains that bad faith shouldn't be presumed where "incompetence" (or, more specifically, user error) is a much likelier explanation. --
Lord G. matters. 08:50, October 23, 2019 (EDT)
My proposal Idea wasn't to block proposals from being made, but to block archives from being edited. I'm not so sure how that would work out though. Mad Hunter (talk) 09:05, October 23, 2019 (EDT)
- Except in said overreaction, you missed that it wasn't an archive page you edited (which we have several of, already maintained by regular uses and admins alike), but an older revision of the current page. Locking either page would have been pointlessly obstructive, especially when the simpler solution is to pay a bit more mind to what you're editing. -- Lord G. matters. 09:36, October 23, 2019 (EDT)
- Also, the main proposal archives are already full-protected (except the current one, archive 54). I do agree that, since protecting only old revisions is impossible, fully protecting the proposal page would inevitably end up completely destroying the point of a proposal (why even have a proposal on the main proposals page when only admins can vote anyway?). TheDarkStar
10:05, October 23, 2019 (EDT)
- Also, the main proposal archives are already full-protected (except the current one, archive 54). I do agree that, since protecting only old revisions is impossible, fully protecting the proposal page would inevitably end up completely destroying the point of a proposal (why even have a proposal on the main proposals page when only admins can vote anyway?). TheDarkStar
Huh. How was I even able to edit that anyway if the archives were protected? Mad Hunter (talk) 10:10, October 23, 2019 (EDT)
