| Display title | Draft talk:Cloaked Participation |
| Default sort key | Cloaked Participation |
| Page length (in bytes) | 887 |
| Namespace ID | 3003 |
| Namespace | Draft_talk |
| Page ID | 3301 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 1 |
| Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Delete | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Page creator | Kristomun (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 13:05, 25 March 2022 |
| Latest editor | RobLa (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 06:12, 26 March 2022 |
| Total number of edits | 4 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 180 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | I was wondering if perhaps this page should be removed. I've searched all the posts on EM for "cloaked participation", "acpc", "pcpc" and couldn't find any posts with either of these terms. In addition, there are no known methods that fail ordinary participation but pass these, at least not from the examples given on this page. So about the only thing it says is that certain methods pass even a weakening of Participation. I could write a page about mono-add-plump and add those results to a generalization/notes section to preserve them, in that case. Any thoughts? User:RobLa, User:Dr. Edmonds? Kristomun (talk) 13:05, 25 March 2022 (UTC) |
