Wikipedia talk:Administrators' newsletter/2017/10

Rough guide to extended confirmed protection
Can you mention the creation of Rough guide to extended confirmed protection? It has been created by a number of users and I've just moved it to WP space.

The feeling was that consensus had built up around use of ECP but this had not been documented anywhere, causing confusion. This page could be seen as a parallel for Rough guide to semi-protection.

Yaris678 (talk) 11:46, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I have added it. I am not sure what the etiquette is with adding things to the newsletter, but since I had no reply I thought I would be bold.  If the regular newsletter contributors aren't happy with this edit, I am OK if they move/change/delete it. Yaris678 (talk) 06:48, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delayed response. Admittedly, I did not see your note here until now. I don’t have any loud objections at this time to including this in the newsletter; the only thing is that the information contained within the page isn’t exactly new. Out of curiosity, was there something that precipitated the writing of this page, such as a misunderstanding regarding an application of ECP? Mz7 (talk) 18:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The impetus came from this discussion: Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection. Essentially, consensus has formed to interpret an ArbCom ruling one way, but people keep submitting protection requests based on a different interpretation. This has already happened once since the information page was written. Yaris678 (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2017 (UTC)