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
Jemather (talk | contribs)
154 edits
Line 6: Line 6:
==Current requests for protection==
==Current requests for protection==
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}

===={{la|French People}}====
'''semi-protect'''. constant vandalism. [[User:Jemather|Jemather]] 19:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)



===={{lt|Spoiler/doc}}====
===={{lt|Spoiler/doc}}====

Revision as of 19:47, 16 May 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.

    semi-protect. constant vandalism. Jemather 19:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Edit warring over content of template instructions. --Tony Sidaway 19:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection to alleviate edit-warring by sockpuppets churned out at high rate Phaunt 19:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Alison ☺ 19:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection requested to alleviate anonymous vandalism. --ElKevbo 18:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Alison ☺ 19:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Quakerman 18:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, one IP vandalising, and you have not warned them yet. I'll do so now. – Rianaऋ 18:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Request semi-protection due to repeated vandalism by anon users following the death of Jerry Falwell. Red Herring 18:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mangojuicetalk 18:23, 16 May 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.


    Page has been protected for a long while now since 28th Feb i think thats way to long. Pages shouldnt be protected for this long, just to make it easier for others Lil crazy thing 19:21, 16 May 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

    Edit war breaking out over whether or not to include a warning about the plot of the play. --Tony Sidaway 17:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected due to revert warring. Majorly (talk | meet) 17:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Full-protection, Requesting temporary protection because of a minor edit war over the interpretation of WP:TRIVIA policy. This is affecting the large number of articles that use this template. -- Nick 16:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected due to revert warring. Majorly (talk | meet) 17:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Continuous IP vandalism from a variety of addresses, varying from "I love Florida" type of stuff to the "it's shaped like a penis" variety of vandalism. -Ebyabe 15:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 (talk) 16:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Images are repeatedly being restored on the page. eZio 13:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected – Steel 13:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. High level of IP vandalism, appears to be generated by local students nearing end of school term. SwissCelt 13:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected – Steel 13:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection For a long time, I resisted asking because quite a few of the anon edits were valid. Well not anymore. It now consists of color changes (of the table), name order changes and adding unsourced info. And also vandalism. All disruptive and against consensus. I'd like to see it semi'd until a couple of days after the results are announced. That would be May 25th. I am an admin but I am way way heavily involved in the article to protect it myself. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 13:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected – Steel 13:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Page was semi-protected due to a "linkspam" from a single user. However: (1) The link is just a tutorial. These kind of link is very common in programming language article, and shouldn't think as spam; (2) The "spam" link is from one single user, the user have now registered (see talk page). Semi-protection can't stop a registered user from adding the link again. -- SDiZ 13:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected, it's been a long time. – Steel 13:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protection. Article is being vandalised DAILY by same user on non-registered IP and SPAM vandals replacing article citation links and inserting SPAM links and POV at around the same time every day. Keeping article unvandalized is a daily chore. Vandalism is by the same user. Most all vandalism is by IP 63.254.78.142 who's only contributions are repeated vandalism on one article, posting POV, erasing citations, and keeps reposting what appears to be a copywritten POV diatribe from somewhere without clearance. Blocking this IP should get rid of most of the vandalism, but PLEASE semi-protect this article - or I am going ask that you just delete it if nobody will protect it. I have worked with other editors to edit out some of the content that vandal kept defacing, and he just went on to defacing other content - but the article content is not the problem... BOTTOM LINE IS THIS... this is a user that doesn't care enough about Wiki to even bother registering, but somehow cares enough to go to this one article EVERY SINGLE DAY and deface the article by - erasing the same citations (which then results in fact tags being put in, then the citations reinserted. This same user then often puts in links for a company called "National Corporate Research" and occasionally inserts a lengthy diatribe that appears to be copied from somewhere without (c) clearance - and borders on defamation. I seriously think that if I didn't erase some of the stuff this idiot posts, Wiki would probably be sued. This user very occasionally uses another IP (as with today). If you semi-protect for even a short period, this will force the user to register (which trust me - to vandalize this article they will do), then at least we can track even when he/she moves to other IP's and/or block. PLEASE HELP and semi-protect for 30 days - or alternatively delete article which I'm sorry I ever wrote.Dougieb 03:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Please reconsider - at least PLEASE semi-protect long enough to force vandal to register so their defacements can be tracked. The vandalism is DAILY - that is 365 instances a year by the same user - who does nothing but vandalize this one article. please reconsiderDougieb 10:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protection - When the page is unprotected, 80-90% of the edit count comes from timewasters, leading to work for other people.--Ianmacm 07:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Sr13 08:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection - An anonymous user has been continuously advertising his website here; has had to be reverted about 20 times since early March; IP address to broad for a block. Was protected once already by Veinor on 16th March. Spammer is also likely to spam on Puzzle. Marasmusine 06:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Sr13 08:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Looking through the list of protected pages, I can find no reason this page was semi-protected. The talk page also contains no information about why this page was protected. The page is about a historical figure from the 1800's who is not of great note or controversial in any fashion. Qapf 07:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Edit: Stupidly forget to look in the edit history, looks like autprotection was triggered in late April. Request for Unprotection stands as the article has been protected for over 2 weeks. Qapf 07:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Protected due to some IP vandalism, but it's a low risk article, and long term protection seems unnecessary. – Rianaऋ 07:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    User Yamla and Steel has been doing some bad faith decisions on my page by first blocking me for no good reason other then that they dont like me i haddent even been back for even 24h. Then Steel blocked my talk page so i cant request unblock which is my right. Then i sent a unblock request before totall blocking which steel denied even tough their was no clear case. Please look trough this case properly and you will see i have done nothing to deserve being blocked until november which is just a unreasonable timeblock anyway.And do i even have to mention that i dont want either of theese to admins to make the decision.Unblock user:Matrix17regards--90.225.121.21 16:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    This is the place to request page un-protection, not user un-blocking. I recommend that you e-mail one of the active arbitrators at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee to request unblocking if you feel your block was justified and the blocking administrators decline. Best, Iamunknown 17:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: The arbcom is not the best way to get yourself/others unblocked. Email unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org and thoroughly explain the situation. That is the best way to get a second admin opinion. -Royalguard11(Talk·Review Me!) 22:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I guess I'll tag this section with Declined so the bots take over; recommend mailing unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org or an ArbCom member. --Iamunknown 07:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined, - requested by blocked user evading block - Alison ☺ 23:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection List used by FearBot to manage it's filters - requesting semi-protection since vandlas could cause FearBot to perform undesired behaviour if they added common words to badwords list and/or add spam words to goodwords causing it to not recognise spam. I considered not using a page however this way makes it easy for anyone to update and improve the bot. This can be undone if FearBot is not accepted as a bot (currently under review). Thanks! TheFearow 04:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Full-Protect Edit warring between 2 users. Cannot attempt to make any improvements on article or additions, they will just get caught up in this edit war. No discussion is on the discussion page either. 74.204.40.46 04:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    User talk:Ned Scott (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Semi-protect. My talk page keeps getting trolled by someone from the University of Maryland, and the IP changes often. The first IP that starting doing this was blocked for it, but they're keeping at it. Semi-protection for a two or three days hopefully will be enough. -- Ned Scott 02:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 3 days. Krimpet (talk) 03:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. -- Ned Scott 04:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protect. Huge amounts of anonymous IP vandalism over the past two weeks at least. The first page of history appears to be almost completely covered with vandalism and reverts by editors but almost nothing else. AllynJ 02:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.TerriersFan 02:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Vandalism from four different IPs in the last half hour or so. Short term protection (12-24 hours) should be enough. 69.201.182.76 02:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. And it's best not to protect articles while on AFD. – Rianaऋ 02:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-Protect Lots of IP vandalism. Election is Tuesday, 5/15/07. Please semi-protect to prevent anonymous vandalism throughout the next day. Candidate Chaka Fattah's page is semi-protected because it was vandalized a lot recently. Please also semi-protect the other major candidates: Bob Brady, Tom Knox, and Michael Nutter for the next 48 hours. Aardhart 02:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC) Bob Brady (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Tom Knox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Michael Nutter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)[reply]

    Declined: not enough vandalism on the others like there was at Chaka Fattah to justify semi-protection. Krimpet (talk) 02:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC) P.S.: vote Nutter! ;)[reply]

    Semi-Protect Constant vandalism in the past week. Ambrosia- 20:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Moronic vandalism is occuring more often than usual. Probably 7th and 8th graders angry at their chemical homework? Mr. Raptor 13:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Phaedriel - 13:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Lame edit war over a section header. Request full protection. >Radiant< 12:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected. 24 hours to talk it over. Marskell 12:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi protect- vandalism levels extreme, (as usual). Telcourbanio Care for a talk? 10:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 4 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. – Rianaऋ 11:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Continuous IP vandalism - I've just reverted about 2 days worth of changes to get to a reasonably stable version, and even that required a bit of tidying up. David Underdown 10:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected – Rianaऋ 10:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. High level of IP blanking vandalism. Tristan.buckmaster 09:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. – Rianaऋ 10:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Lame tag war. Request full protection. >Radiant< 09:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. – Rianaऋ 10:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    full protection A number of vandalism attempts by both IP and newbie accounts within the last 3 days. Ranging from juvenile humor to replacement of images and text.--293.xx.xxx.xx 08:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Alison ☺ 08:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. IP vandalism in the past few hours. In addition, this has been reported in the website of a nationally-circulated news paper in the Philippines minutes ago, so this might attract more vandals in the next few hours or even days, as the national elections have just concluded. ---- Tito Pao 05:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - we don't pre-emptively protect but this is bad enough already - Alison ☺ 06:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    full edit warring (a couple probably already past 3RR) sigh --Iamunknown 03:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. - by User: John Reaves - Alison ☺ 03:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=131367859"