Difference between revisions of "User talk:Dante Linden"
Dante Linden (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
::Agreed, for all reasons explained by Strife --[[User:Opensource Obscure|oobscure]] 10:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC) | ::Agreed, for all reasons explained by Strife --[[User:Opensource Obscure|oobscure]] 10:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
::Unprotected. I initially didn't have privileges to protect any pages and was using that page to test my new privileges. I didn't realize others added to that page and agree that vandalism is easily caught. [[User:Dante Linden|Dante Linden]] 19:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:22, 21 July 2009
Protected
I noticed you protected the Release Notes/Second Life Server/1.27, I think this overkill. We rarely get vandalism on the wiki and when we do it doesn't go unnoticed. I'm pretty much the only one who does any edits to the Release Notes, I go through and add links and categories, mostly linking them into the rest of the wiki, creating new synapses as it were. For the LSL documentation it helps us keep track of bugs and when they are fixed; we can use the "What link here" page to see which release notes link back to the articles. By protecting the page it's akin to a little pocket of dead gray matter; or a little black hole, links go in but they don't come out. We can't predict what the future will bring, it might bring vandalism or it might bring a higher order of understanding and organization. I beg you please, unprotect the page. -- Strife (talk|contribs) 00:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed, for all reasons explained by Strife --oobscure 10:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- Unprotected. I initially didn't have privileges to protect any pages and was using that page to test my new privileges. I didn't realize others added to that page and agree that vandalism is easily caught. Dante Linden 19:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)