User talk:CharlieEdited
I do not feel ECP on the page is necessary due to the relative infrequency of edits. I don't know how low it should be, but I propose no protection with pending changes. You can make it semi or no protection at all if you want but ECP is no longer necessary. If vandalism returns it could go higher. CharlieEdited (talk) 20:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm a little hesitant to reduce protection on a highly visible article (over 110,000 pageviews a month) which has been subjected to high levels of vandalism (1,690 reverted edits), and even with current protection gets vandalised: [1]. The article has continued to grow since protection ([2]), so the protection in itself has not stopped editing - despite a comment on the talkpage saying that is the case. What has happened is the number of edits has declined - the bulk of which were reverted: [3], but the quality of the edits has proportionally increased. The Extended-confirmed-protected edit requests on the talkpage are working as intended - with speedy responses. Because, before the semi-protection, there were over 200 IP edits a year, it would inappropriate to apply PC, as that is too many edits to monitor (PC is intended for "infrequently edited articles"). However, let us try semi-protection without ECP to see how it goes. ECP has now been removed. SilkTork (talk) 09:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- It seems to be going quite well so far. CharlieEdited (talk) 14:57, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
"Underlinked"
[edit]Please use this template sparingly. I don't know how it happens, but this edit led to dozens and dozens of unhelpful edits, including the overlinking. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 23:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- I think my usage of it was correct in this case since there were only four links in the entire section. However, I did not anticipate it leading to that much overlinking. Thank you. CharlieEdited (talk) 00:27, 5 September 2024 (UTC)