Forum:Protect featured images?

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Protect featured images?

Note: This topic has been unedited for 6491 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Pre-protection comments/poll

With the recent suggestion of copying and protecting featured articles, I have decided to bring up a possibility I've been thinking would be a good policy: Protect featured images from being overwritten or (rev) (reverted to earlier versions). My reasons for this are thus:

1. They appear on the front page.
2. As they are voted as the best of Uncyclopedia, they shouldn't often need to be edited.
3. Other users can upload the file to a new name if they wish (unlike Articles which should stay in the same place), and the original author could request temporary unprotection at any time for reuploading or editing copyright information.
4. Monitoring uploads is a pain, someone can overwrite/vandalize a featured image and the only notification of this action is in the upload log. Even worse, there is no indication in MW 1.5 that this is an overwrite (in 1.4, a page creation notice was shown next to the upload notice, in Recent Changes). This has happened to me with one of my featured images.
5. Adding images to your watchlist, or using Recentchangeslinked (pointed at the Featured Image Category, for example) does not show uploads overwriting existing images.

Thoughts? --Splaka 10:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I concur. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 10:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, and is there a proper place to discuss the preservation of featured articles?   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 22:09, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Some discussion of it here: Forum:George_W._Bush. --Splaka 03:18, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Sure. --—rc (t) 04:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

A good idea. It was the one that was voted on, so it's the one that should always be displayed. --Uncyclon - Do we still link to BENSON? 07:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Post-protection comments/biatching

Done. I also checked that they all had the 'featured' version as the current. I think they all did. I also edited {{ImageFP}} a bit. --Splaka 10:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I believe that arbitrarily protecting an image just because the article that uses it is featured is excessive. Unless of course the image has been vandalized. --Leg 04:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

We didn't. The images we protected were voted as Featured Pictures. Different from Featured Articles. --Splaka 05:45, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Revisited

Should we unprotect former featured images? Or possibly semi-protect them (to autoconfirmed users)? --Splaka 03:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Let's just unprotect them since they don't appear on the front page anymore. —rc (t) 03:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. --Splaka 03:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)