File talk:Extended-protection-shackle.svg

Make the blue follow WikimediaUI guidelines[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Can this by overriden by File:Extended-protection-shackle-wikimedia-blue.svg? The blue is not following WikimediaUI blue (See design.wikimedia.org) most of blues in the interface follow that, for example Template:Ambox. Ladsgroup^overleg 20:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Spintendo. This image is protected so only admins can override the upload. Why can't I use the template for this? Ladsgroup^overleg 11:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done @Ladsgroup: You will need to establish a larger consensus for this, as the current designs were the result of an 2018 RfC addressing colors and shading. I'm not suggesting you need a new formal RfC, but you will need to discuss in a wider forum such as WP:VPR, Wikipedia talk:Protection policy, or the like. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:46, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying, I'm so happy they got redesigned and I'm so sad some are not following the color scheme we are trying to adapt. Thanks again Ladsgroup^overleg 21:58, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ladsgroup: I think most of the original debate was over the "design" and not so much over the shade of colors - if you want to tackle this in toto check over all of the colors and make one discussion post for all the shade variants you'd want to change with a before->after comparison. — xaosflux ^Talk 22:12, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux:. There was a disscussion already about hte colors in general (See Special:Diff/754712927 for more details). Is it enough or do you think more disucssion is needed in this case? Ladsgroup^overleg 22:17, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ladsgroup: no, as the RfC is 2 years more recent then that request. However, it is good background and I'd include it in a a discussion at WP:VPR or another widely attended venue. — xaosflux ^Talk 22:25, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Xaosflux, Hey given the consensus, Can you fix this and the other three? Thanks! Ladsgroup^overleg 19:19, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On hold reviewing the technical parts. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ladsgroup: the current images are marked as public-domain, the version you uploaded you licensed as (CC BY-SA 4.0). It is also claimed that the current are not eligible for copyright due to their composition. Do you agree to re-release these 4 uploads as public domain? (1, 2, 3, 4). Thank you, — xaosflux ^Talk 00:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is mostly so that we can target clicks on the images to go to the wikipedia pages, not to the image descriptions for attribution. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:43, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: I hereby write that 1, 2, 3, 4 are released under public domain Ladsgroup^overleg 09:58, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I updated the license to PD-self on commons: — xaosflux ^Talk 13:18, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doing... — xaosflux ^Talk 13:18, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done @Ladsgroup: I've executed this by creating a new version of the files, this may take some time to update in page and thumnail caches. Please review and let me know if you see any issues. — xaosflux ^Talk 13:26, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Snamaza 91.251.4.61 (talk) 19:47, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Typo/default description[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the description section “ Full protection lock with grey shackle” -> “ Extended Confirmed protection lock with grey shackle” (This specific edit is CC0 no attribution required)Geardona (talk to me?) 11:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done — xaosflux ^Talk 15:34, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]