SkipCaptcha, nsSupply_SidersR, nsSupply_Siders_
8,436
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: + + + + + + + + − == Proposal ==+ + +
Conservapedia:Policy proposals (view source)
Revision as of 21:51, March 21, 2009
, 21:51, March 21, 2009description - first draft
== Proposal ==
The following is a little complicated technically, but it's actually a very minor proposal with a very minor scope.
As some may have seen, a while ago I created Template:Officeholder, which has a bunch of sub-pages for different offices.
Template:Officeholder is cascading protected, and all of the subpages show up on it (or, for those more familiar with template-speak, they're transcluded on it). Thus, all of the sub-pages are protected because of cascasion; my proposal is that they not be individually protected.
The reason for this is that if the pages are individually protected, it becomes excessively difficult to unprotect the sub-pages, because not only would the sub-pages have to be unprotected, but the page itself would have to be unprotected. Now, that doesn't seem to hard, but then when you're talking about making one minor change throughout each sub-page, then it's a lot of extra work. If my proposal were passed - the only page that would need to be unprotected is the first, over-arching page. So I'm saying that if a template sub-page is set up to be protected by cascading, then it shouldn't be protected individually.--<small>[[User:Iduan|<span style="color: #FFCCCC; background: #660000">I]][[User_talk:Iduan|<span style="color:#CCCCFF; background:#000033">Duan]]</span></span></small> 17:51, 21 March 2009 (EDT)
; Proposal : If a template sub-page is set up to be protected by cascading, then it shouldn't be protected individually.
; Pages affected : [[Template:Officeholder]], possibly '''a few''' future templates, but the need for sub-pages is not very common at all, so not many.