On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 6:54 PM, John Mark Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:49 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) > <bjor...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM, John Mark Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Before this, there was no expectation that a page could be protected > >> such that sysops could not alter the content of the superprotected > >> page. > >> > > > > This is false. > > Care to explain? > https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Manual:$wgRestrictionLevels&diff=519048&oldid=451673 shows that protection levels that prevent sysops from editing were considered as far back as 3 April 2012, for example. > > Most of what MZMcBride posted there has nothing to do with actually > > breaking superprotection. Editing a page that isn't superprotected isn't > a > > break in the protection feature itself, for example. > > Of course it is. It isnt a 'feature' until it actually works at the > released product level. > You appear to be confusing superprotection with something else, likely the much larger concept of preventing JS hacks to disable MediaViewer. -- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
