Wikipedia talk:Protected titles/Historical list of titles

message: Any ideas on how to improve the header text? The current text is pretty nice, but when you really, really, really think of it, it has certain kind of Orwellian feel to it ("War is Peace, Ignorance is Strength, Welcoming New Articles is Protected Titles"). I could probably come up with a better text if I weren't under such heavy sedation. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 19:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to suggest any changes that you come up with.  I transcluded the header from one location for exactly this reason.  —David Levy 19:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The opening box lies!  No, seriously, it says that some of these were discussed when they simply weren't. That needs to change. --badlydrawnjeff talk 21:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great idea, not so sure about the header. 

message: Does this new cascading protection work with redirects? Or would it protect the page that is being redirect to? --Robdurbar 13:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The "protected titles" setup is strictly for nonexistent pages.  Redirects should be protected via the conventional method.  —David Levy 23:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirects

message: Does cascading protection apply to images?  I tried adding :Image:Circle-question.svg to Wikipedia:Protected titles/The Colbert Report/List (nonsense Colbert stuff has been created twice) but it didn't seem to protect it. --BigDT 18:40, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The template is incompatible with image pages, but simply transcluding the image at a size of 1px (or any size) would do the trick.  —David Levy 18:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does that mean we could use this instead of uploading main page images?  That would be a lot easier. Chick Bowen 16:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind--of course it makes no difference since the main page is cascade-protected anyway.  Don't mind me, I haven't had any caffeine yet today. Chick Bowen 16:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I've updated the template for compatibility with nonexistent images.  If an image doesn't exist at all (locally or at the Commons), simply use the template normally (specifying "Image" for the "ns" parameter).  If the image exists on the commons (and you wish to prevent the creation of a local page under the same title) also append "commons=yes" as an additional parameter.  Keep in mind that this will not protect the Commons file.  —David Levy 09:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images? 

message: Add Like this one to the list so as to protect against re-creation of the deliberate red link.  --Stratadrake 19:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Chick Bowen 20:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The other red link 

message: 
Hi, please add a link to :de:Wikipedia:Gesperrte Lemmata. Thanks. Greetings -- kh80 21:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, thanks! Kusma (討論) 09:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  interlanguage link 

message: Can someone add  to the top of this page, in response to concerns raised at WP:VPM#Three issues; related with sockpuppeting, admin abuse, and javascript toolbar. Also, does this page (not the subpages) need to be protected at all, and if so, is cascading protection necessary as removing the protection would not break the function of the page, since only the subpages need to be cascade-protected for it to work. Tra (Talk) 15:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dab added.  I'll let someone who actually knows something about this page remove the protection, but I don't see a reason why it is protected. Cheers, BanyanTree 15:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The page is protected because it's a likely vandalism target (given the fact that would-be vandals are sent here when their vandalism attempts are thwarted) with virtually no need to be edited by non-sysops (given the fact that only sysops are capable of creating the protection pages and linking them here).  —David Levy 15:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation links 

message: The category link for this page shouldn't have a colon in front of it. --- RockMFR 03:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, seems reasonable. -- ReyBrujo 22:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Category

message: Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse/Willy_on_Wheels - kind of a lame page as it's only semi-protected.  I think it's best of it's just salted with Protected titels. Hbdragon88 08:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request? 

message: Is there a difference in function between using the cascaded protection feature, versus the  template? Which should I use for new cases? –RHolton≡– 16:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Salted pages. The template suggest using this solution. Note that the main idea is to have deleted link showing in red than in blue, and to prevent them appearing in Special:Shortpages or similar lists (like orphaned queries, etc). -- ReyBrujo 17:36, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Special:Random too.  —David Levy 17:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using Protected titles vs. using Protected deleted pages 

message: Is it my imagination, a caching problem of some kind, or is there sometimes a delay of up to about five minutes before the protection works?  I tried purging my browser cache, so that doesn't seem to be the problem.  Chick Bowen 06:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You'll need to purge the page on which the deleted page is transcluded. Awyong J. M. Salleh 12:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just noticed the purge link at the top of the monthly list.  Thanks.  Chick Bowen 12:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delay? 

message: Hmm... just a technical addition to my earlier reply. If you're listing on one of the "by month" pages, you must purge the month page which is explicitly protected (Wikipedia:Protected titles/February 2007 for example) and not the list page for that month which is implicitly protected through cascading (Wikipedia:Protected titles/February 2007/List). Until you purge the month page, the deleted title will only be considered as being transcluded on the list page but not the month page, and hence the protection does not cascade to the deleted title. You can verify this difference by looking at whatlinkshere for the deleted title before and after purging. (Found this difference trying to protect European Society of Oxford University (Since 1950s).) Awyong J. M. Salleh 09:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Technical explaination?

message: Please make an interwiki to :zh:Wikipedia:被保护的标题 in Chinese Wikipedia, thanks :)。--Littlebtc 11:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: - Harryboyles 11:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki 

message: Since it's a new question on an old page - Wikipedia:Protected titles/February 2006
Sukael \o/ 17:02, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're asking about Peppers, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 February 21/Brian Peppers. Chick Bowen 23:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A question 

message: 
Pleaase add th:Wikipedia:ชื่อที่ถูกป้องกันการสร้างใหม่ for interwiki links. Thanks! --Jutiphan | Talk - 20:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Sandstein 21:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  interwiki link 

message: Since there are not protected titles in this page, I suggest unprotecting it. There is no reason to keep this protected, and prevents anyone from editing the interwikis. We should follow the German lead and keep the main page unprotected. -- ReyBrujo 12:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I asked about this before but I was told that it's kept protected as a likely vandalism target. Maybe the cascade-protection should be taken off and just have a template at the top of the page that can be edited by anyone, to put in the interlanguage links and an explanation of the page. Tra (Talk) 14:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotecting this page 

message: Please add he:ויקיפדיה:ערכים לא קיימים ומוגנים. – rotemliss – Talk 14:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: -- ReyBrujo 15:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki for he: 

message: One of the shortcuts to Wikipedia:Protected titles, what does it have to do with this? BuickCenturydriver   (Honk, contribs)   22:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:WP:JUPE and it's Kept RFD. — xaosflux Talk 23:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also see Jupe (IRC). It's a bit obscure, but not quite entirely random. ;) – Luna Santin (talk) 19:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  JUPE 

message: This page probably ought to go in :Category:Page protection. Since it is protected itself, it should also have a proper protection template rather than just being in :Category:Protected – remove that category and add  – Gurch 19:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. CMummert · talk 01:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection and categorization 

message: Please change Thai interwiki to th:วิกิพีเดีย:ชื่อที่ถูกป้องกันการสร้างใหม่ due to recent namespace name changes. Thanks --Jutiphan | Talk - 19:23, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  —David Levy 19:27, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  th interwiki 

message: I'm not sure what the reasoning is behind not having Wikipedia:Protected titles/DVD/List linked on this page (if there is any reasoning at all). Should it not be added? --- RockMFR 20:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably so it is not obviously listed anywhere because the listing does contain the number. I think people have stopped spamming the number everywhere, though, so I will delete this if no one objects, or add it to the main listing so it is not forgotten. —Centrx→talk • 19:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DVD list 

message: :Category:Protected deleted pages has 137 pages at this moment. Isanyone willing to prune it again? --Derlay 09:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Protected deleted pages]] 

message: What do you think about merging Wikipedia:Protected titles/Deliberate redlinks and Wikipedia:Protected titles/Wikipedia-related? If anybody is interested, I have created User:Mike Rosoft/protected titles. - Mike Rosoft 09:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Might as well as long as they are separated like that. Most of the "deliberate redlinks" are not in fact technically deliberate redlinks either. —Centrx→talk • 19:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?

message: Add ar:ويكيبيديا:عناوين محمية please.--The Joke النكتة‎ 22:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: —Kyриx 00:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ar iw 

message: Due to a current RFC, I learned of an admin that has three pages in their User namespace which are protected title lists.  Is it appropriate for an administrator to maintain a list of protected titles in their namespace?  If yes, should we have a centralized list of such lists?  GRBerry 18:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your concern is that there is no centralized list of these protected titles? EdJohnston 18:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a concern, yes. I think, in general, that salted titles should be centrally listed so we can keep track of them. It's really skirting the edge of the protection/salting policy to keep your own list in userspace, especially since it's hard to find and lacks transparency. The other problem is that it circumvents the mechanism for a non-admin to un-salt a page. Basically, they have to ask permission of the particular admin who's mainting the protection list, rather than making an open request at WP:DRV etc. In the particular case referenced above, an admin had deleted and salted the RfC page on himself, using his private userspace salting list - which meant that a non-admin would have to ask his permission to create an RfC on him, assuming they could figure out the unorthodox salting methodology in the first place. MastCell Talk 18:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

text: (ec) That, plus whether it would be appropriate for one administrator to unprotect a page on a protected title list in an individual administrators user's space.  GRBerry 18:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be appropriate, yes.  The admin doesn't own the salted pages;  nobody should need to ask permission to unsalt them.  --Kbdank71 18:54, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not an admin, but it makes the most sense to centralize the protected title list, per MastCell. Shalom Hello 20:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

text: If it's imperative to salt so many articles that we'd break WP:PT, then that's an important issue we should be sharing with the developers. MastCell Talk 22:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would work for me, since it would address the problem of transparency and maintaining a relatively unified list of protected titles. MastCell Talk 15:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for taking that on. It looks good. We should probably add a link to the list from WP:PT. MastCell Talk 20:52, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Linked. - TexasAndroid 12:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are admin specific protected title lists appropriate? 

message: Dear administrator, please add the following interwiki link:
 ia:Wikipedia:Titulos protegite
Thank you in advance, --Julian 11:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 14:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki link 

message: I did a conversion from regular protection to cascading protection of the outstanding old style saltings a couple of days ago.  I included the images from the old style saltings, as I have seen a number of people toss images onto the monthly salting pages.  But the salting does not appear to be preventing people from re-uploading the images.  See Wikipedia:Protected titles/Old SALT 4 for the list, and scan to the images at the bottom.  :Image:10m.jpg, for instance, is back, and I have deleted :Image:Zac efron.jpg twice now since I converted these.  Did I miss something? Or does this simply not work for images? - TexasAndroid 16:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: David Levy has updated the salting page, I presume to fix this issue.  Assuming he knows what he's doing better than I knew what I was doing, this issue is likely resolved now. :) - TexasAndroid 17:15, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, it's fixed.  You just need to use the syntax  instead of .  —David Levy 17:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks. - TexasAndroid 17:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cascading prevent image upload? 

message: Wikipedia:Protected titles begins with "Template:Deletedpage links after after the outcome..." which might make more sense if changed to "...links here after...". --Derlay 21:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done - TexasAndroid 21:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 

message: 
Please add a link to Wikipedia:Protected titles/Twinkle for pages cascade-protected via that method. Thanks! Videmus Omnia  Talk  16:45, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --- RockMFR 18:17, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editprotected request 

message: What about protecting talk pages of internet spider bots? For example, to prevent Googlebot from "having new messages" in their cache (like here)? -- ReyBrujo 12:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is more Google's responsibility if they do not want to display those messages. Also, IPs do change, and there are thousands of IPs spidering the Web, a list of which we would not be able to maintain. —Centrx→talk • 22:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet bots 

message: I see that the Signpost is reporting that protection of non-existent pages is finally being implemented.  Do we need a plan to convert the existing PT links to the new format? Chick Bowen 16:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mediawiki version of this? 

message: The recent mediawiki fix that made all WP: links equal Wikipedia: has apparently meant that WP:PT no longer links to Wikipedia:Protected titles, but to :Template:Protection templates. I've created WP:PTS to be a (temporary) redirect to Protected titles. Is there any consensus to change the redirect back to protected titles from the template? -- Flyguy649 talk 00:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shortcuts 

message: I'm requesting fi:Wikipedia:Uudelleenluonnilta suojatut sivut to be moved above sv:Wikipedia:Skyddade sidnamn and below ru:Википедия:Запрещённые названия. This is because of cosmetic reasons - Finland is "Suomi" in Finnish language, so it helps when it's placed on the S section instead of F section. ~Iceshark7 (talk) 20:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if we should remove the protection from these pages, since they are obsolete now. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 23:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki order change of fi 

message: Has confused the hell out of me. Can someone point me to where I can find lists of protected pages now? Chubbles (talk) 16:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Special:Protectedtitles. Same name, different namespace. --ais523 16:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Is it possible to order the list (say, by date?) Chubbles (talk) 17:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not easily, I don't think. --ais523 18:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, I used to check the additions to this page as they were newly added. I would like to continue to be able to do so...Chubbles (talk) 18:37, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The new system probably isn't as useful in that respect (although ask at WP:US/R, a script might be able to do it); however, the change had to be made, as the old method was too hard on the servers. --ais523 18:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Special:Protectedtitles page, being new, doesn't have much functionality yet. It would certainly be possible to add the requested functionality to that page, if someone writes the code to do it. You could file a request in bugzilla. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The new change