Forum:Why is a user able to edit someone else userpage ?

is there a reason why a regular user able to edit someelse user page ? is there a security setting to lock my user profile page ? kind of like my wikia blog. no one can edit it except admin and the creator. WieQuadrat (talk) 18:21, October 7, 2012 (UTC)
 * If you are an administrator, you can protect your userpage so that only other administrators and yourself can edit it. If you are not an administrator, then you might try asking one to protect your userpage. ~ Toci ~ Go ahead, make my day. 18:30, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, lucky i'm an admin. but if a reqular user request the protection, can i set it as "no user allow to edit except admin and the creator of user profile" ?. Also is there a way for apply this security to ALL user profile page ? it will be a lot of work if all member in my wikia to ask for it. i consider user profile page and wikia blogs are a personal space for each member. so one maybe not appreciated if someone suddenly edit my user profile page.... WieQuadrat (talk) 03:33, October 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * Not built-in no, it's counter to the Wiki principle. The only pages with that sort of editing restriction in vanilla MediaWiki are the user script pages (/global.js /global.css /wikia.js /common.js etc.). There is an extension for MediaWiki which will give you the behaviour you want but you'll need to request it be installed on your wiki: mw:Extension:UserPageEditProtection.


 * Note: As a sysop, you can do a trick where users create a sub-page called "User:Name/profile.css" then they edit their profile page to contain the code . A sysop can now lock the profile page and only sysops and the user themself may edit the CSS file. This does require a lot of manual work on your part per user, Wikipedia sysops do this but only for people who explicitly ask for it. Lunarity 03:54, October 8, 2012 (UTC)

Wow so unbelievable weird.... the userpage should be consider like user-blog.... but i haven't give up. i want to try to protect the user page and will see how much effort just to protect one user first. This is tv-myuserpage. i'm an admin and once upon a time, someone edit my page, it's in good intention but nevertheles i feel a bit violated.

what is sysop ? i'm an admin and founder also.

from the above response from Lunarity, there are 2 possible way to achieve what i want. from WieQuadrat (talk) 05:05, October 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) using mw:extension = contact wikia staff to ask to enable it ?
 * 2) using profile.css = may i know the step on do this ? what kind of lock setting should i use for the profile page and css file ?
 * I think the extension will be better. You can see how it works on VSTF Wiki. Not sure if the staff readily activates it or not. ~ 06:05, October 8, 2012 (UTC)

Well, my opinion is that some wiki users are signing on friends list. Otherwise, I think the ability to edit user pages can sometimes be neccesary, as the user can give some exernal links (promoting something) or blatantly insulting a specific person, or in some dire cases, everyone. E n e r g y X ∞ 21:12, October 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * I've always disagreed with other users editing others' userpages simply because of vandalism and such. The userpage belongs to the user itself; none other than the user the page belongs to should edit it, not others, regardless of intention.  Love and Lust  22:45, October 8, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with only that respective User being unable to edit other Users' pages. However, Admins should be able to be able to also edit User Pages (so then, if a template is on a Wiki relating to User a being blocked, then it could be used). Fling That Butter! 23:04, October 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * To Energy X: If they want to sign on a friends list, can't they use the message wall/talk page etc?


 * I agree with Love and Lust and Fling That Butter - only the user himself/herself and admins (or higher) should be able to edit the user's own profile page (I must admit to being the user that WieQuadrat refers to at the start of this thread whose profile was amended by another user). I can't see how protecting a user's profile violates wiki principles.


 * Oioiaussie 23:40, October 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * If you can agree that user pages shouldn't be edited by others than the user it belongs to because of possible spam/vandalism... then you can agree to the opposite. If a user creates their page with spam/vandalism and no other users can revert it, it will remain there until an admin is notified. Most wikis have a mutual respect unwritten rule to "not edit others' user pages". Some wikis actually encourage people to help make their user page look nice. In fact, a user on Central recently (within the last year) made nice templates for all of the staff that agreed to it (see User:Trellar, User:Dopp, etc). That would not have been possible if only admins could edit those pages. Rappy 23:58, October 8, 2012 (UTC)

Hi Rappy! I certainly can and do agree that spam and vandalism should be reverted ASAP. However, at least the wiki I am an admin of is very active and well monitored. Spam and vandalism is reversed pretty quickly there. That's not to say that all wikis are well policed.

Of course, my page could have been vandalised by the user concerned (in fact, it was not - he was trying to add some stuff) and I don't feel that others should have rights over it. As an admin, I have now protected my page but a global option to this would be better, IMO.

Finally, adding features such as templates for users and pages can be done on testing pages, yes?

Thanks for the response. Oioiaussie Please do not send me gifts. Thanks in advance. 00:18, October 9, 2012 (UTC)


 * To clarify my original statement, the wiki principle is "anyone can edit anything at any time if they believe they can make it better". This extends to user pages like anything else on the wiki. Now, when it comes to user pages, it is generally always inappropriate to add or remove content from someone else's page, but this does not exclude minor editing. Sometimes people make mistakes, and they generally don't read their own profile page so they don't notice. Standard wiki editing of fixing bad links (links to pages that exist, so they're blue, but are the wrong page than the one implied by the text on the link) and typos are possible legitimate reasons to do so.


 * Certainly wikis should have a policy that prohibits altering user pages of other users in any substantial way (other than removing vandalism, or blanking out the page of a spam/vandal account) and awards an infraction for doing so, but locking all user pages seems like a nuclear solution to something that you only really need a "do not edit this" signpost for [it also implies a lack of trust in the other people on your wiki which can become a cultural problem that leads to edit warring (i.e. encouraging the "this page is mine, don't touch it!" mentality), then people can use the fact that user pages are protected to snipe at each other until an admin breaks it up].


 * You're free to disagree, of course, if most people on your wiki agree that no-one should edit user pages for any reason ever then you can try to get the extension installed; I do believe that you'll find that to be more trouble than it's worth if your wiki gets big enough though. [Wikis don't stop when people go on vacation for example, pages might be moved, images might get deleted, etc. while you're gone and no-one other than sysops will be able to correct the red-links until when (or even if) you come back] Lunarity 03:55, October 9, 2012 (UTC)

eh ? so many response. Yesterday i already contact wikia staff to activate the extension of protecting user pages. and currently waiting for response. I agree with the wikia open to be edit. I understand the reason for user pages free to be edit by anyone because of potential spam, marketing, vandalism from the creator them selves. And i would agree for that decision from wikia central. But how come Wikia Blog is not behaving the same like that ? Wikia Blog in my opinion can give a more potential threat of vandalism, negativity, marketing , spam. we have some of that in our TinyVillage.wikia.com. and Blog cannot be edit by other user (optional commenting) but admin can. and so because of that reason, i want user profile behave the same as Wikia Blogs. Other wikia may have a different approach on Blogs and certainly about editing other User Profiles page. If this become so much an issue, then i wish it can be as an option when setting new wikia (Free-to-edit User Page [On/Off]). by --WieQuadrat (talk) 05:41, October 9, 2012 (UTC)


 * You are 100% correct, WieQuadrat. I see no reason to allow others to edit a user's user page.
 * In answer to your original question "is there a reason why a regular user able to edit someelse user page" - Yes, the reason is that user pages are standard wiki pages, and behave the same as any other page. Blogs are a Wikia extension, that behave differently to standard pages on a wiki, and have different rules.  I believe that Wikia should change user pages to behave differently.  Technically, both userpages and userblogs are all still CC-BY-SA licensed content, which anyone is free to copy/modify, but since userblogs are locked to the user, there is no reason userpages should not be changed follow the same new rules.


 * What if a user creates their own spam page? - My response: What if a user creates their own spam blog post?  The fact that an admin would be required to remove self-vandalism from userpages is a weak reason to allow open-editing.
 * Fixing broken links - I concede that is is a valid point. But what about bad links in a blog post?  If a user finds a bad link in a blog post, they should leave a comment with the user informing them of their mistake (and if they don't fix it in a week, contact an admin) - I see no reason not to apply the same solution to bad links on a userpage.
 * Locking all user pages is overkill - All userblog pages are locked, therefore this argument is not very compelling. If "Locked userpages violate the principles of a wiki", then so do userblogs, message walls, and the new forum system.
 * What if a user wants someone to create a pretty userpage for them - My response: That's what drafts are for. Someone can create a pretty draft page, then the user themselves can copy/paste it to their userpage.
 * Additionally, the optimal solution would be a new standard page-protection option "Allow only admins and the user by the same username to edit this page", which would be enabled by default and can be disabled if necessary if a user wants other people to edit their page.
 * Friends-lists - I've never heard of this concept, and it sounds weird that someone else should be able to "add themselves" as your friend. Even facebook requires a user to accept a friend-request.


 * I've discussed this issue in the past, but didn't know about that extension. I've now requested that it be enabled, so thanks for bringing this up, WieQuadrat! -452  23:42, October 10, 2012 (UTC)