Talk: The Keep of the Gnollslayers

Locked?

I do not understand why this article is forbidden to non-registered users to edit. Janze-Nek 06:35, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

if you look at the history, this article was target of anon spam 2 times and the admins probably decided to lock it to prevent further spam. it happened to other articles too. --Vraeth 08:51, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

At its most recent, the spam to this article occurred 2.5 years before the article was locked.

I am thinking, as I was when I first posted, that an admin glitched on hir tools and did not fix hir error. As sad as I find that, it is better than believing s/he locked the barn not only after the horses were gone, but after most of the barn had been torn down. Janze-Nek 14:34, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

well if you look at the logs below, the lock occured 1 month after the first of the 3 spams to the article

1. (cur) (prev) 07:44, July 11, 2007 Uberfuzzy (Talk | contribs) m (Protected "Keep of the Gnollslayers" [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed]) (undo)
2. (cur) (prev) 20:10, July 10, 2007 Sassinak (Talk | contribs) m (Reverted edits by 203.162.27.95 (Talk); changed back to last version by Skethsis) (undo)
3. (cur) (prev) 18:26, July 10, 2007 203.162.27.95 (Talk) (undo) spam
4. (cur) (prev) 03:11, June 29, 2007 Skethsis (Talk | contribs) (removed spam) (undo)
5. (cur) (prev) 02:20, June 29, 2007 67.15.92.98 (Talk) (undo) spam
6. (cur) (prev) 15:30, June 12, 2007 FlorenceSopher (Talk | contribs) m (Reverted edits by 218.182.213.79 (Talk); changed back to last version by FlorenceSopher) (undo)
7. (cur) (prev) 14:33, June 12, 2007 218.182.213.79 (Talk) (undo) spam

--Vraeth 14:51, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

That explains how a non-admin can get there name on a protection note. Thanks. Janze-Nek 15:46, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

Well, the person that did the protecting was Uberfuzzy, who is an admin. But there definately have been folks that were admins in the past that are no longer, inactive admins were pretty well cleaned up not that long ago. --lordebon 16:06, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

In any case, whatever spammer was targeting this article is probably long gone. I'm going to add an Admin Needed tag here and ask that the protection be removed from the article page (even though autoconfirm protection is not all that tight of a security). --lordebon 15:34, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

The protection is now removed and yes, the problem was indeed spam attacks.--Kodia 19:10, December 26, 2009 (UTC)