Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
VoABot (talk | contribs)
Bots
29,709 edits
m BOT - Moving/clearing older requests. [PR: 1 | UR: 0 | RfSE: 0 | FR: 3]
→‎Current requests for protection: Wikipedia:IRC channels/wikipedia-en-admins - edit warring by admins and high level editors
Line 8: Line 8:
==Current requests for protection==
==Current requests for protection==
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}

===={{lw|Wikipedia:IRC channels/wikipedia-en-admins}}
'''Full protection''' with as many warnings as can be attached. This page has been the subject of an ongoing edit war involving multiple administrators and long-term editors for the past several days, and has been temporarily protected on at least two occasions. Administrators have edited the page during protection. Editors and admins have been blocked and the edit-warring is now the subject of an Arbcom case. Recommend page protection for at least a week. [[User:Risker|Risker]] ([[User talk:Risker|talk]]) 08:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)


===={{la|White Pages}}====
===={{la|White Pages}}====

Revision as of 08:38, 26 December 2007


"WP:RFP" and "WP:RPP" redirect here. You may also be looking for Wikipedia:Requests for permissions, Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission, or Wikipedia:Random page patrol.
    Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.
    Shortcuts

    Before requesting, read the protection policy. Full protection is used to stop edit warring between multiple users or to prevent vandalism to high-risk templates; semi-protection and pending changes are usually used to prevent IP and new user vandalism (see the rough guide to semi-protection); and move protection is used to stop pagemove revert wars. Extended confirmed protection is used where semi-protection has proved insufficient (see the rough guide to extended confirmed protection)

    After a page has been protected, it is listed in the page history and logs with a short rationale, and the article is listed on Special:Protectedpages. In the case of full protection due to edit warring, admins should not revert to specific versions of the page, except to get rid of obvious vandalism.

    Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level
    Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level
    Request a specific edit to a protected page
    Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
    this header: view • edit


    Current requests for protection

    Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

    ====Wikipedia:Wikipedia:IRC channels/wikipedia-en-admins (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Full protection with as many warnings as can be attached. This page has been the subject of an ongoing edit war involving multiple administrators and long-term editors for the past several days, and has been temporarily protected on at least two occasions. Administrators have edited the page during protection. Editors and admins have been blocked and the edit-warring is now the subject of an Arbcom case. Recommend page protection for at least a week. Risker (talk) 08:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection, WP:COI edits by IP user, followed up with reverts to restore spam and prevent NPOV entries from appearing. -Plausible_deniability (talk) 04:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 06:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism Important information in the page are being deleted intentionally.

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 03:13, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect - two (or more likely one) anonymous IP editor keeps blanking the page in a fit of pique. Suggest semi-protecting until the close of the AFD, which should probably be extended a day or two because of this nonsense. Otto4711 (talk) 02:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Jmlk17 03:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection. Two editors are warring away at edits. Full protection is to urge both users to dispute anything via the talk page rather than reverting every time. Nguerrero03 (talk) 02:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 02:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Full permanent protection. The Nagorno-Karabakh article was split such that there is now a separate Nagorno-Karabakh Republic article which will be used throughout wiki with {{flag|Nagorno-Karabakh Republic}} in various articles. Please apply full protection in the same manner that other country templates have full protection. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 02:06, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection. Back and forth edit-warring. Full protect to facilitate RfC respondents to hash out concerns on talk page without reverting each other simultaneously. Check article logs and edit history for history of protections and relevant editing activity. Cirt (talk) 01:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 02:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Very frequent vandalism within the last 7-10 days..Kakofonous (talk) 00:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 02:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection , WP:COI edits (and edit-warring to keep them in place) by IP Addresses allocated to the organization which is the subject of the article. See User talk:Jeff G.#Communist_Party_of_India_.28Marxist.29 for details.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:05, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 02:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection, Requesting semi-protection for this page, indefinitely blocked sockpuppet User:Kidsunited continuing to repeatedly insert inaccurate POV information under anonymous IPs 62.65.*.*. Request to restrict editing to established users. —PētersV (talk) 21:08, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Second that and adding a list of articles with similar problems, we're dealing with a sockpuppet master Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Bloomfield, Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Kidsunited who has been busy creating fake states on WP. Cleaning up the whole thing might take some time and has proven to be difficult since the blocked sockpuppet master keeps up with his/her agenda. Thanks!--Termer (talk) 21:14, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Kurykh please reconsider, according to the comment I've left for one these declines. Thanks --Termer (talk) 21:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    We do not preemptively protect pages; please read the top of this page. Most of those articles haven't been touched for weeks, so protecting them makes no sense. Protection is not used to make your life easier. I stand by all my declines thus far. —Kurykh 21:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, your report doesn't seem to make much sense; you're asking us to protect some pages that only the sock has edited. —Kurykh 21:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Well, in case there is anybody who is willing to put up with this guy per article basis, sure, the rule you mentioned would make sense. I'm definitely not willing to take that role, to clean up the articles and list these for semiprotection one by one. It's taken more than half a year to track down all this nonsense the guy has been adding to WP anyway. And in case we can't get it out of his hands the articles are going to ridicule WP for some times to come. Hope you checked out Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Principality_of_Estland, to understand the length and depth what we're dealing with here. Thanks!--Termer (talk) 21:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    There will be hoaxes on Wikipedia as long as they allow everyone to edit; this isn't the first, and it won't be the last. If you think they are hoaxes, use WP:AFD or just revert. If it gets out of hand, ask for outside input at WP:ANI. This isn't the right forum. —Kurykh 21:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection There is an edit fight going on. Please, break it up someone. Footballfan190 (talk) 03:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.   jj137 ♠ 03:54, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for unprotection

    Shortcuts

    Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.

    • To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
    • Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
    • Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
    • If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.

    Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

    The bogus 3RR report that resulted in the page being protected was filed by a disruptive SPA who has now been indef blocked. See Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Lwachowski. Regards Bksimonb (talk) 13:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 15:41, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for significant edits to a protected page

    Shortcut

    Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.

    • Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
    • Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{Edit COI}} template should be used.
    • Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
    • If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
    • This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    temporary full protection Dispute, OR and ref disputes since twelve months ago.Will (talk) 22:39, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Kurykh 02:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protect please. Suddenly increased IP vandalism of a page with already delicate content. Túrelio (talk) 21:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It's just a single IP, and we don't lock down pages for that. —Kurykh 21:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.   jj137 ♠ 21:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.   jj137 ♠ 21:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.   jj137 ♠ 21:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Kurykh 21:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined; no edit since December 21. —Kurykh 21:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined; no edit since November 16. —Kurykh 21:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined; there hasn't been a single edit since December 8. —Kurykh 21:17, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    comment, sure, nobody has been able to keep up with the guy since he has been all over the place. I'd suggest still semi protecting all articles the guy has been busy with since it's too boring to return to this. Thanks!--Termer (talk) 21:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.   jj137 ♠ 21:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined; no edit since December 17. —Kurykh 21:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.   jj137 ♠ 21:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.   jj137 ♠ 21:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.   jj137 ♠ 21:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.   jj137 ♠ 21:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=180223321"