Wikipedia talk:Protection policy

Fix the redirect links that lead you to a redirect page to instead be the redirected page (not the redirection page)? Alimsts (talk) 13:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

shortcut links i mean Alimsts (talk) 13:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Alimsts: Are you commenting about the protection policy? If yes, which links are an issue? Daniel Quinlan (talk) 01:38, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why are the links in shortcut boxes leading to redirect pages but the redirect shows a link instead of actually taking you there? Alimsts (talk) 09:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hold on I get it they loop round Alimsts (talk) 09:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When the link in the box takes you to the redirect page, this is an intentional feature of Template:Shortcut, and is nothing to do with the protection policy. Changes to that template should be suggested at its talk page, because this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia:Protection policy page.
The behaviour of the redirect page itself is coded into the MediaWiki software at a fairly fundamental level; and not only is that also out of scope for this page, it is nothing that we can alter anywhere within Wikipedia. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:36, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
👍 Alimsts (talk) 07:53, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on extended confirmed

Please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Extended confirmed definition. It is a proposal to change WP:XC from 500 edits + 30 days to 500 edits + 90 days. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ammending text that allows preemptive protection authorised by arbitration remedy

Per remedy 5 of Indian military history arbitration case, I would suggest ammending text to reflect that admins can preemptively protect pages in topics authorised by arbitration remedy under the preemptive protection section:

−
Exceptions include the Main Page, along with its templates and images, which are indefinitely fully protected. Additionally, [[Wikipedia:Today's featured article|Today's Featured Article]] is typically semi-protected from the day before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page until the day after it leaves. Pages subject to [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] remedies that specify protection by default without requiring prior disruption are also an exception.
+
Exceptions include the Main Page, along with its templates and images, which are indefinitely fully protected. Additionally, [[Wikipedia:Today's featured article|Today's Featured Article]] is typically semi-protected from the day before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page until the day after it leaves. Pages subject to [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee|Arbitration Committee]] remedies that specify protection by default or permit preemptive protection without requiring prior disruption are also an exception.

Stylez995 (talk) 13:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As this entire section is already about exceptions to preemtion, perhaps just simplifying to: "Pages subject to Arbitration Committee protection remedies are also an exception." ? — xaosflux Talk 13:50, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can keep it simple in a way that reduces the chances we'll need to revisit the wording in the future. I would recommend Pages subject to Arbitration Committee remedies that permit or require preemptive protection may be protected accordingly. The permit or require could even be shortened to authorize, but I think permit or require is a bit clearer. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 22:24, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and made the change. I added the word "Finally" at the start of the sentence to improve the flow and I also updated the footnote (rather than try to update the policy for every future Arbitration Committee decision, I just linked WP:GS which people tend to update long before this policy). Daniel Quinlan (talk) 05:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]