Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Protection policy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Protection of template redirects

Is it a common practice to apply same protection level of a template to its redirects, regardless of their transclusion count? For context, I was asking User:Primefac here to unprotect Template:Film name, which has only 13 transclusions. They denied because its target Template:Infobox name module is template editor protected and due to perceived risk of vandalism. I have since looked and found more low use template redirects with template editor protection. As per first paragraph of the subject page, Wikipedia aims to keep as many pages open to as many editors as possible. So is it justified to protect low use template redirects because their high use target template is protected? Srf123 (talk) 17:04, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actions at Wikipedia should assist the encyclopedia. While open editing is good, Wikipedia is not an exercise in liberty. Once a redirect to a protected template has existed for a significant period, some people will be used to how it works and what it is supposed to do. Unprotecting the redirect in the hope that a passing IP might improve it would not be productive. Johnuniq (talk) 02:16, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]