Template talk:RFPP

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Semi-protect 2 Update 3 Possible update 4 Please fix this 5 Request for a change for "Indefinite"

[edit] Semi-protect

Should the page be semi-protected? I think it should. FictionH 18:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Look at the page history. Only one account of vandalism. It is a highly used template, but if it starts to be vandalised, then it should be protected. –Spebi 11:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm convinced that although the vandalism rate is low, it will cause more good than harm to semi-protect the template - newbies generally don't need to edit this. I'll semi-protect it. Nihiltres^(t.l) 13:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Update

I've update the template - a couple of people wanted a "already unprotected" option. I've also switched to clearer set of icons - its particular better for the "declined" and "already" ones IMO. WjBscribe 19:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I must admit, I liked the old icons much better. What was the improvement in particular for those icons you mentioned? I'm decent with vector images, so I could probably mirror improvements in the older style. Nihiltres^(t.l) 21:16, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Have to say, I like the new ones better, as well as the clarification around SALTing and the 'already done' options. The new icons are ... more subtle or something - Alison ☺ 21:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Well for one thing the old icon for "already protected"/"already unprotected" was pretty random - having the clock seems clearer. Also the symbol that was being used for "decline" is used as an "oppose" symbol on multi-lingual projects so it seems confusing to use that here. The X seems a more obvious "decline". The old icons are also quite associated in people's minds with there use at RFCU. Aside from that, I think the new icons are aesthetically more pleasing (though that's obviously a minor point) and the occasional bit of change seems like a good thing. WjBscribe 21:53, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Oooh, shiny new icons. :-) By the way, shouldn't we have a "RFPP's not for fishing" icon like the one at WP:RCU? On a related note, I think that the periods should be removed from the first three templates. One often intends to write something immediately after the template and the period just cuts it.--Húsönd 01:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I have to add that after seeing the new icons on WP:RFPP, I think I prefer the old ones. These seem too dead or too dim or too whatever prevents them from standing out like the old icons.--Húsönd 01:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed re. the periods. I still like the new icons, mind. Also, a "Protection is not pre-emptive" option would be neat - Alison ☺ 01:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

That's another good idea.--Húsönd 03:27, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I've added a "not pre-emptive" option. Haven't managed to sort the full stops yet though. WjBscribe 03:57, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

No more full-stops :) Thanks for the pre-empt update - Alison ☺ 04:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, thank you, thank you for removing those periods. I'd been using the raw template syntax just to avoid them :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible update

Is it possible to create an RFPP template similar to this?

Declined — Featured articles on the Main Page are not protected unless there is severe and unrelenting vandalism.

I ask because I see a large amount of requests at WP:RPP asking that the day's FA be protected because of vandalism. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 23:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I've added this in [1] – Steel 23:44, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank'ee. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 01:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please fix this

The template spat out the following:

Semi-protected for a period of indefinite. After indefinite the page will be automatically unprotected.  

When is "after indefinite"?--Thinboy00 ^talk/_contribs @955, i.e. 21:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Where is this? WjBscribe 21:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

This was on the page it's supposed to be used on, but i forgot the link... this is an old version, i just realized....-- Thinboy00 ^talk/_contribs @958, i.e. 21:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

The template should only have a time parameter if the protection is for a given time. If the page has been protected indefintely, it should should be {{RFPP|full}} only, not {{RFPP|full|indefinite}} which will result in the output you described. WjBscribe 22:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for a change for "Indefinite"

For indefinite protections (EG. Userpages), the template returns things like "Semi-protected for a period of indefinite. After indefinite the page will be automatically unprotected.", which is a load of nonsense (The latter part). Can some recognition of "indefinite" be added so it returns a difference sentence like "The protection will never expire, but must be manually revoked if need be" ? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 05:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

OOps, I missed the above. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 05:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)