Forum:Protect AOTM

Forums: Yew Grove > Protect AOTM

This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 9 September 2009 by Calebchiam.

Seing as the AOTM is on the main page and is seen by everyone who comes here via the main page (which I'm sure at least 90% do) I propose that we semi-protect the AOTM until the next month when a new AOTM is chosen. Short and sweet.

Discussion

Support - As nom. — ^E n _ig^ma 21:03, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Coming from Wikipedia, users have suggested to protect the day's featured article many times, and every single time, the proposal has been rejected (it's actually a perennial proposal [1], which basically means "don't suggest it again unless you have a really good reason for doing so") - these are the reasons why. Basically, by doing so, we assume bad faith of newcomers, and we also deprive them of the wiki spirit, because we want to show them that it's a wiki world and that they can edit. It's also a semi-violation of our protection policy (the aforementioned article lists it as violating Wikipedia's protection policy, but for the same reasons, it violates ours as well), which says, "Protecting pages pre-emptively is generally discouraged. Only protect when there is persistent vandalism coming from many IPs/accounts, or if there is an on-going edit war that is showing no signs of cooling down. Blocks should be used instead of protection whenever possible.". Therefore, I oppose this proposal. Butterman62 (talk) 21:32, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - This idea of protecting an article for the month is irrelevant, as there is an on-going discussion to have AOTM (or Featured articles) to be displayed randomly from a list of featured articles. Protecting random articles, though not impossible, is impractical. az ^talk 22:19, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Butterman. @Gaz#7521 22:22, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Gaz. - TehKittyCat (talk) 22:26, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - It just may be the first article people go to, and if they can't edit it, the whole "Anyone can edit" motto goes away. Doucher4000^******r4000 23:50, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Butterman. I'm not a big fan of pre-emptive protection. --Quarenon _Talk 19:06, September 7, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - It seems silly to me how everyone is citing "anyone can edit" and no preemptive protection, but the main page and many popular templates are preemptively protected. TEbuddy 21:00, September 7, 2009 (UTC)