Wikipedia - you know something we don't?

[Fuji]

Hi all. I’m not one who usually hangs in out in this end of the Dope, but I just came across this amusing nugget of weirdness, and had to share it with you all.

So I’m checking out the Wiki page on Prometheus, friend of man and rationality (should be the patron saint of the SDMB, if that wasn’t itself self-contradictory), and I notice the little padlock up in the top-right corner. Huh? A figure from Ancient Greek mythology is somehow controversial? Even weirder, the reason for the protection is listed as:

“This article is semi-protected to promote compliance with the policy on biographies of living people.”

As an astute observer noted on the related discussion page, having to state the obvious:

“Why is this article (semi-)protected? Prometheus is not a living person.”

WTF?

[Inner_Stickler]

I’m guessing, based on the talk page, some editor put a lot of work into the article and then was afraid it would be vandalized to hell and back so he locked it. (And then died, presumably, as it’s been locked for a couple of years.)

[jjimm]

This seems to be what triggered the protection.

Let’s go to the quarry and throw shit down there.

[jjimm]

Oops, wrong link. This.

Prometheus bought a unicorn. He named his unicorn after his great-grandmother, Aeschylus. Prometheus rode his unicorn every day and fed him gumdrops that fell from the sky. One day, it rained lollipops. Aeschylus doesn’t like lollipops, so Prometheus had to climb the Great Rainbow Mountains to dig up the gumdrops that grew inside volcanoes. It was a very risky task, but Prometheus completed it safely, with the help of his second wife, Shelly. At the bottom of the mountain, Aeschylus was waiting for them. He was overjoyed that they had got him some gumdrops to eat.

[Paul_in_Qatar]

I see nothing (right now) to show it is or ever has been protected. But perhaps I do not know what I am looking for.

[jjimm]

@Paul_in_Qatar

I see nothing (right now) to show it is or ever has been protected. But perhaps I do not know what I am looking for.

It’s indicated protected by the padlock top-right of the article. Go to the article and click the “history” tab at the top and then expand that to view 500 entries. Search in page (from the bottom) for the word “protect”. You’ll see the following:

07:46, 10 February 2009‎ Nishkid64 (talk | contribs)‎ m (30,230 bytes) (Protected Prometheus: Page-move vandalism ([move=sysop] (indefinite)))

[Autolycus]

@jjimm

Oops, wrong link. This.

Nonsense. Everyone knows Aeschylus loves lollipops.

[davidm]

@jjimm

Oops, wrong link. This.

Who goes to the trouble to compose a story like that and post it? Someone with a grudge against Prometheus?

It’s not like it’s going to stay up long anyway.

[Fuji]

Thanks for getting to the reason for the lock, jjimm. Still, makes no sense to me why this particular article remains locked when there are countless other daily examples of vandalism on Wiki. And I still maintain that the reason listed in the padlock mouse-over is just downright weird.

[ctnguy]

They’ve changed the message; now it says something about “ongoing high risk of vandalism”. Why that should be the case remains a mystery.

[KinkiNipponTourist]

@ctnguy

They’ve changed the message; now it says something about “ongoing high risk of vandalism”. Why that should be the case remains a mystery.

It’s simple, really. Like his liver, Prometheus’ vandalism regenerates itself every night.

[BigT]

@Fuji

Thanks for getting to the reason for the lock, jjimm. Still, makes no sense to me why this particular article remains locked when there are countless other daily examples of vandalism on Wiki. And I still maintain that the reason listed in the padlock mouse-over is just downright weird.

My guess? Because no one cares enough about the article to get it taken back off. I’ve seen other pages that had to have someone request that the page be unlocked.

I personally won’t do it, as I think it’s funny.