As this is the Meta forum, it seems the logical place to discuss Meta-Wiki.

Our own Majorly was asked to unprotect the Meta main page - so he did so! Not surprisingly, it was immediately vandalised. Our own Rootology reverted it.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?titl...&action=history

Majorly's justification for the unprotection deserves recording for posterity.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?titl...1&oldid=1142248

"It was never protected ''with'' consensus, so there really shouldn't need to be consensus to undo it."

Was there ever a consensus to protect the main page on any other project? Can we look forward to unprotection of the main page of Commons, say?

It was pure dumb luck that I caught that within a minute of it happening--I'd just popped onto meta to look something up right then.

Is there ANY Main Page on any project that isn't some ultra low volume obscure wiktionary that isn't sysop protected? I mean, Meta is a fairly important one, in the scheme of things...

Simple isn't protected, I seem to recall.

It's only recently commons had it protected (log). And yes, there was consensus for it to be protected. I cascade-protected it after someone uploaded a shock image over the picture of the day, which to me seems common sense. In the end, everyone agreed to keep it fully protected.

With the case of meta, there's not really any images to vandalise on, and it's hardly a highly viewed page.



You're right. It's not.

Aha - someone moved the thread without saying.

The Simplewiki main page is semi-protected, as is the one for Simple wikiquote. The one for Simple wiktionary is fully protected. (Hey, why no Simple wikisource?)

Not enough texts in Simple English (whatever that is).