Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase

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.

Requests for page protection
You are currently viewing the subpage "Current requests for increase in protection level". Return to Requests for page protection. Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level Request protection

Londonbeat

• Londonbeat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Long-term abuse from Italian IPs, some of which were blocked as Special:Contributions/151.46.128.0/18. Binksternet (talk) 19:20, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.

Question: Binksternet, the German, French and, uh, Italian Wikipedias (3/3 I looked at) all say British-American, so why are you removing American with no explanation? El_C 19:42, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Because of energetic campaigning by Italian IPs. Sources universally call the group British. Binksternet (talk) 20:01, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

In the 3/3 major language projects I looked at, though? What, is this sock some kind of wizard? Also, I can't say I'm familiar with this group, but they have one member with an article, Jimmy Helms, who is an American. So, I'm sorry, but it's not really adding up for me. El_C 20:12, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@El C: Archiving this, but I would put more stock into what WP:RS are saying, especially when it was added by a banned sockpuppet. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 21:53, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm still responding, though, unless you compel me against doing so. Anyway, if indeed, it's universally, then, I suppose. But is it? Yeah, that sock is flooding the revision history, which is ridiculous. But it's not like I was trying to find evidence to support or oppose either position. The results are what they are, and reflexively taking a position due to that sock's egregious conduct — I'm not sure that's an ideal position. El_C 22:23, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

More directly, sweeping whatever is happening under the rug, in my view, is a poorly thought out approach. El_C 22:32, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Note: Sorry, I misinterpreted the status. I removed the archive template and restored the discussion. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 23:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Okay, a few points before we move this along. First, WP:CIRCULAR notwithstanding, I've been using the German Wikipedia (and Hebrew one) as a litmus test since the mid-2000s. Yes, there are two WPO threads about this right now (or I wouldn't think twice about it), both authored by the sock. One was locked (Binksternet, FMSky, and "anti-US" music deletionism), which is unusual for that forum—and says something about the 'energetic' efforts of that sock—while the other one created the next day (Presenting the history: cultural bias on music pages). Both feature evidence I have not reviewed. But it does not mean the sock is inherently wrong on the facts just because they have been so inept in advancing their position (including at the WPO).

So, as mentioned, I had gone to the German Wikipedia presuming it'll feature British only, and call it a day. But no, British-American. So I looked at another large language project, the French Wikipedia. Same thing. So I try one more. Italian IPs? I'll try the Italian Wikipedia. Same thing; 3/3. At this point I notice that the only member who has an article is an American and I go hmm. Because, at WPO, the sock claims and brings evidence, which again I've yet to review, that Binksternet (and FMSky) is doing the same thing—removing legit American mentions—from multiple articles. And that is where we left off before you confused my understanding of how RfPP works (i.e. I know leaving question or note at the bottom of requests stops the bot from archiving).

Anyway, RfPP is not the best venue to discuss all this, but perhaps a good starting point. But the forced-archiving sort of threw all that for a loop. So that's it from me about that, for now. Also noting that I'm not too familiar with the English Wikipedia music articles ecosystem (compared to history, politics, etc.). One final point that goes beyond this topic: when the contested edits (even from banned users) are relatively benign, like British → British-American, I think it harms the project when those socks are reverted dozens and dozens of times in succession. Since it completely floods the revision history, thereby making those portions of it pretty much unusable. So, something to consider in the future, Revirvlkodlaku — maybe stop after like 10 and wait for protection? Certainly in this case, it would have been better if you'd let the sock's edit stand until protection was applied. Because look at the revision history mess now. El_C 14:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Adal Sultanate

• Adal Sultanate (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: addition of original research content Magherbin (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Daniel Case (talk) 20:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Cameron Stracher

• Cameron Stracher (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: Persistent disruptive editing Broc (talk) 21:19, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 23:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Toy Story 2

• Toy Story 2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Edit warring by Special:Contributions/2600:100C:A100:577F:0:0:0:0/64. Block evasion by Special:Contributions/2600:100C:A116:2AE5:0:0:0:0/64. Binksternet (talk) 21:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

St Pancras railway station piano

• St Pancras railway station piano (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: The 2024 incident section is being somewhat vandalized by unbiased users which might act on a political agenda, with no editing history to confirm their unbiasedness. I would like to know if protected status is possible, that being Semi-protection. However, the page should also be cleaned up when protecting, because the current state is not representative of the event (undue weight issue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Due_and_undue_weight) WikiEwout (talk) 22:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Amin Husain

• Amin Husain (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing and accelerating edit war triggered by a current event. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 22:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Brittany Mahomes

• Brittany Mahomes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – vandalism. Joeykai (talk) 23:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 23:28, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Example Article Name

• Example Article Name (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: High level of IP vandalism. 223.24.189.206 (talk) 23:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC)