nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
902
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 40:
Line 40: + +
User talk:Jenkins (view source)
Revision as of 02:20, September 25, 2007
, 02:20, September 25, 2007→Protection spree?
::So the answer is to simply protect all articles that have anything to do with atheism (and thus with religion, and thus with creationism, and thus with evolution, which is the other end of the chain)?
::So the answer is to simply protect all articles that have anything to do with atheism (and thus with religion, and thus with creationism, and thus with evolution, which is the other end of the chain)?
::I repeat my question: Is this the CP way of doing things? Blind protection because some evil atheist could get the wild idea to edit? --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 22:16, 24 September 2007 (EDT)
::I repeat my question: Is this the CP way of doing things? Blind protection because some evil atheist could get the wild idea to edit? --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 22:16, 24 September 2007 (EDT)
:::(I wanted to ask about this too, and, well, this looks like the place). I can't see that any vandalism has occured on those articles... in fact, for some of them, the almost sole contributor for a while now has been you. Maybe you could give other editors the benefit of the doubt, Conservative? If vandalism or edit wars do occur, then you could justifiably protect the pages again. But to do so pre-emptively just seems rather unnecessaray... and prevents anyone else from contributing, either. [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 22:20, 24 September 2007 (EDT)