Wikipedia talk:Protected titles/Historical list of titles

Great idea, not so sure about the header.
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)


 * 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)
 * 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)

Redirects
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)


 * 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)

Images?
Does cascading protection apply to images? I tried adding Image:Circle-question.svg to 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)


 * 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)
 * 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)
 * 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)


 * 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)

The other red link
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)
 * Done. Chick Bowen 20:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

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

Disambiguation links
Can someone add  to the top of this page, in response to concerns raised at WP:VPM. 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)


 * 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)


 * 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)

Random articles
Could someone chuck in, , , and  to the list of protected self-references/intentional red links, please? I count at least 20 deletions across all five pages. Thanks. MER-C 10:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * While you're here, could you shuffle Help talk:Starting a new page/wiki/Talk:Main Page/ and Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines/w/index.php from Feb 07's listing to WP:PT/SPAM and give the latter an alphabetical sorting? Thanks.


 * P.S. if you really want to do some drudgework, you can empty some spamtraps of deletedpages, as no one will create those pages without a spambot. MER-C 12:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Done, done, not done (don't understand what you're asking ... and calling it drudgework put me off figuring it out!). Proto ::  ►  14:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:Protected against spambots
Almost everything in Category:Protected against spambots could probably get added here, if anyone's feeling bored. --- RockMFR 19:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * This could be done by deleting the articles in that category with each of these links:

                                                                        
 * Then creating a page with the following text:


 * Then setting it to cascade protected. Tra (Talk) 21:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Note that not all of these pages should be deleted. There are some pages like Everson v. Board of Education which should remain in the category. --- RockMFR 22:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, I've taken out the pages for where their equivalent article page already exists. Tra (Talk) 00:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your assistance! I've transferred the above titles (excepting Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/archive toc) to Protected titles/Spam pages with nonsense titles.  For future reference, a non-article page's namespace must be omitted from the title and appended via the "ns" parameter.  Also, there's no need to supply deletion links; I designed the protected title template to do that automatically (and begin transcluding a page immediately upon its deletion).  —David Levy 02:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I am guessing the spambot pages should not be added to the lists by month, should they? -- ReyBrujo 13:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree; there's no need to. The titles are sorted by month primarily for the benefit of editors interested in creating legitimate articles.  (It's easier to find the title in a smaller list, and we can lock in the correct alphabetization at the end of the month).  The spambot titles have no potential legitimate uses, so they can be dumped on the same page until it's big enough to pose technical problems.  At that point, we can simply create a new page with the number "2" appended (and so on).  —David Levy 16:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Category
The category link for this page shouldn't have a colon in front of it. --- RockMFR 03:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

should be changed to --- RockMFR 21:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Done, seems reasonable. -- ReyBrujo 22:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Request?
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)

Using Protected titles vs. using Protected deleted pages
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)


 * 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)


 * Special:Random too. —David Levy 17:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Delay?
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)


 * You'll need to purge the page on which the deleted page is transcluded. Awyong J. M. Salleh 12:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Just noticed the purge link at the top of the monthly list. Thanks.  Chick Bowen 12:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Technical explaination?
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 (Protected titles/February 2007 for example) and not the list page for that month which is implicitly protected through cascading (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)

Alphabetic listing
Is this really necessary? It seems like just a waste of time (Web browsers do have the search feature). It's probably even better to just list them at the bottom, by date. —Centrx→talk &bull; 17:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The alphabetical order makes it much easier to detect repeated page re-creations under similar titles (which helps in determining that a title should be protected after only one deletion). —David Levy 18:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * For older pages, such as those not in the current month being moved from deletedpage, this should not make any difference? —Centrx→talk &bull; 18:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It does if someone is aware of one pre-existing protected title. Upon following the cascading protection link, he/she will immediately see all of the similar titles that were protected during that month.  Also, I believe that titles used for re-creations in subsequent months (and pre-emptive variant protections, which are feasible now) should be grouped together (because the decision to delete and protect Inappropriate article is equally applicable to a re-creation under the title Inappropriate Article).
 * Most of the conversion from deletedpage to WP:PT should be performed by a bot, so alphabetization shouldn't be a problem. And of course, it's easy enough to alphabetize a list at any time.  —David Levy 19:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Any word on a timetable for that bot run, David? There are still well over a thousand transclusions of deletedpage. Chick Bowen 18:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * There clearly is consensus for the new system, but I thought that it would be best to allow some time to phase it in (thereby testing it and watching for any potential issues) before doing anything drastic. I suppose that it's been long enough, so we probably should begin discussing the details.  —David Levy 19:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree. There should probably be a centralized discussion here, with notifications posted to WT:BOT, WP:AN, and Template talk:Deletedpage.  Various issues need to be covered--ensuring that deleted content isn't mirrored, dating, would the content of the logs be copied over or just linked to, would the original protector's name be copied over, etc. . . Chick Bowen 19:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki
Please make an interwiki to zh:Wikipedia:被保护的标题 in Chinese Wikipedia, thanks :). --Littlebtc 11:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ - Harryboyles 11:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

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

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

Unprotecting this page
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)
 * 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)

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

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

Protection and categorization
editprotected

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)


 * Done. CMummert · talk 01:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Get rid of the complete list?
Protected titles/List. Unnecessary and it's already reached its template expansion limit. —Centrx→talk &bull; 14:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Pre-expand include size: 2047995 bytes
 * Post-expand include size: 887703 bytes
 * Template argument size: 571348 bytes
 * Maximum: 2048000 bytes
 * Agreed, maybe we can substitute the lists that won't change anymore if we need to keep the full list. -- ReyBrujo 23:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think there is a list that won't change. Even Brian Peppers will be forgotten about some day so it can be removed, and new deliberate red links are occasionally added. We could substitute them from time to time, but I don't think it is worth the effort. —Centrx→talk &bull; 04:41, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

th interwiki
Please change Thai interwiki to th:วิกิพีเดีย:ชื่อที่ถูกป้องกันการสร้างใหม่ due to recent namespace name changes. Thanks --Jutiphan | Talk  - 19:23, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Done. —David Levy 19:27, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

DVD list
I'm not sure what the reasoning is behind not having 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)
 * 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 &bull; 19:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

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

Merge?
What do you think about merging Protected titles/Deliberate redlinks and Protected titles/Wikipedia-related? If anybody is interested, I have created User:Mike Rosoft/protected titles. - Mike Rosoft 09:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 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 &bull; 19:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

ar iw
Add ar:ويكيبيديا:عناوين محمية please.--The Joke النكتة&lrm; 22:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ — Kyриx  00:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Are admin specific protected title lists appropriate?
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)
 * Your concern is that there is no centralized list of these protected titles? EdJohnston 18:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * 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)


 * (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)
 * 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)
 * 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)

Since it was basically brought to my attention that this is about User:Ryulong/PTL, User:Ryulong/YGOPTL, and User:Ryulong/PKMNPTL, I guess I should give my response. My protected title lists were created because the items listed there are too sensitive to be put on the private lists (user talk pages created by sockpuppets that are not proper), are too many pages solely created and editted by sockpuppets (several hundred fair use images) that would otherwise clutter the central pages and make them impossible to use due to the transclusion limit, pages that I know should not exist (I keep rumors on my main list that I know do not exist), and for some time, an RFC under my name due to sockpuppetry early in my adminship. That was meant to be a temporary measure, but I forgot to remove it from the list, until it was brought up to me later. Honestly, if someone wants to create Image:Yugioh75.jpg, I can be contacted. If Keisatsu Sentai Sapiranger turns out to be a new show next year, then I'll unsalt it.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍 ) 21:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * 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)

I acutally thought that this was about User:Jeffrey O. Gustafson/Finally I am able to keep my userpage from being edited AND keep it a red link, too. Thank you, cascading protection!. hbdragon88 22:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I think the easiest way is to create a subpage in WP:PT that lists all these admin-specific pages (because no doubt some admin unaware of this discussion here will create another such page in the future). That way at least we can find them. A sentence or two explaining their purpose would also be nice.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  08:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * 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)

Since the consensus seems to be having a central list, I've created Protected titles/Specific Admin. GRBerry 20:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * 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)


 * Linked. - TexasAndroid 12:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I created the template PT personal for admin subpages that didn't already contain an explanation or link that a cluefull editor could use to figure out what is going on. I've added it to several pages already.--Chaser - T 19:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki link
Dear administrator, please add the following interwiki link:

ia:Wikipedia:Titulos protegite

Thank you in advance, --Julian 11:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 14:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Cascading prevent image upload?
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 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)


 * 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)


 * Yep, it's fixed. You just need to use the syntax    instead of   .  —David Levy 17:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. - TexasAndroid 17:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Edit request
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)
 * Done - TexasAndroid 21:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Internet bots
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)
 * 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 &bull; 22:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Mediawiki version of this?
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)

Shortcuts
The recent mediawiki fix that made all WP: links equal Wikipedia: has apparently meant that WP:PT no longer links to 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)

Interwiki order change of fi
editprotected

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)
 * ✅ I wonder if we should remove the protection from these pages, since they are obsolete now. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 23:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

The new change
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)
 * Special:Protectedtitles. Same name, different namespace. --ais523 16:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Is it possible to order the list (say, by date?) Chubbles (talk) 17:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Not easily, I don't think. --ais523 18:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * 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)
 * 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. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 19:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)