Wikipedia talk:Protected deleted pages

message: *If it I didn't miss such a page that already exists - does anyone think that it would make sense to set up a page for non-admins to request protection of specific deleted pages? I'm of two minds about the idea - on one hand, it would probably allow for the protection of pages that non-admins come across (I'm thinking of a couple of purely vanity pages on my watchlist that keep getting recreated every couple months or so), but on the other hand, it would probably create a fair number of arguments over protection at the site, probably duplicating the same back and forth that has already taken place during the VfD process. Of course, there's always the possibility of just finding an admin and asking them to delete the page, but I have to wonder how if setting up a request page might find more. --DMG413 01:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:RFPP would be the central location for this, as with any other kind of page protection. Also, you could put a note about it with the speedy delete tag. —Centrx→talk • 23:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:RFPP works for what I was thinking of, though it seems more used for requesting protection of vandal-targeted pages rather than repeatedly deleted pages. As far as the speedy deletion process, that doesn't really solve the underlying problem when pages are created and re-created over a period of months. Thanks. --DMG413 17:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Protecting pages

message: The new cascading protection allows users to create an article with other articles and protect it.  For example, cascading protection on an AFD log page would lock all pages included.  Questions:
#Will this be considered in the near future?
#Will there be a process for undoing the protection over time or are these protections permanent? Super NNesas 12:37, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Protected titles. There has yet been no exact decision on what to do about this. —Centrx→talk • 16:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisting 

message: Just curious if there was away around this so salted pages won't come up.. I just ran into Team Arliss this way.. EnsRedShirt 08:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no way around it per se. We try to keep the number of salted pages to a minimum (thus reducing the chance of randomly hitting one); there is Wikipedia:Protected titles, which avoids the problem entirely but is an imperfect solution for a couple of reasons; and there are plans to develop the MediaWiki software so that non-existent pages can be protected against creation, which is the best solution but has not yet been done. —Centrx→talk • 18:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hasn't this already been done? Take angry dragon - you can't create that page at all and the page itself does not exist, right?--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 23:49, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That page is protected via Wikipedia:Protected titles, which uses cascading protection in a convoluted way for this alternative purpose. It does make it so that a deleted page cannot be re-created, while not displaying the page in Special:Random or counting it in Special:Statistics, but it does have its problems. —Centrx→talk • 20:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Salted articles coming up in with [[Special:Random]] 

message: I noticed at WP:SPEEDY, talk pages of pages that do not exist is a criteria for speedy deletion (CSD-G8).  Therefore, the talk page of an article should be automatically salted whenever said article is salted. —Tokek 09:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the talk page is often the first stop for questions about the deletion or discussion of sources that might legitimately warrant re-creation. In addition, salting is a maintenance hassle the purpose of which is to keep junk out of the encyclopedia, which is much less of a problem with talk pages: Talk pages of salted pages only rarely have any activity, let alone naughty activity, and they are not in the encyclopedia, the main namespace. —Centrx→talk • 03:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of the talk page of a salted page 

message: Just wondering. There are lots of salted pages now...--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 09:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. If not unsalted, which may require a more complex decision, they should at least be automatically moved to Wikipedia:Protected titles at some point. I am the only person who has actively unsalted pages, though. I need to make a script with some decision-making logic to do it more efficiently. —Centrx→talk • 02:51, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are protected deleted pages supposed to be un-salted after a period of time? 

message: Now that you can protect a deleted page directly rather than using transclusion, we probably should have some agreed upon norm for time.  Should completely unencyclopedic titles / attack titles be protected indefinitely?  How long should non-notable people/companies that could theoretically exist at some point in the future be protected?  1 month?  3 months?  6 months? --B (talk) 06:50, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection time 

message: unprotect the page so it can be fixed. Soccermeko (talk) 02:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  InDepenDance Day