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
Tanthalas39 (talk | contribs)
22,377 edits
sp indef
Line 16: Line 16:


==Current requests for protection==
==Current requests for protection==
==== {{la|Steve_Jobs}} ====
'''temporary full protection'' Many attempts per hour to claim he is dead. If someone this important were really dead you'd think major news outlets would cover it[[Special:Contributions/71.154.212.24|71.154.212.24]] ([[User talk:71.154.212.24|talk]]) 23:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}
==== {{lu|Arbiteroftruth/monobook.js}} ====
==== {{lu|Arbiteroftruth/monobook.js}} ====

Revision as of 23:36, 3 August 2008


"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

    'temporary full protection Many attempts per hour to claim he is dead. If someone this important were really dead you'd think major news outlets would cover it71.154.212.24 (talk) 23:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    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.

    indefinite semi-protection , This is my monobook page, and I don't want others to mess with it..Arbiteroftruth (talk) 23:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Tan ǀ 39 23:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary full protection Dispute, Lame edit war over units..- Eldereft (cont.) 22:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary full protection , Lots and lots of reverts - some is vandalism, some seems like a dispute. Do as you will.. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Tan ǀ 39 20:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. After a period of relative calm, recently Anna May Wong has received a series of vandal attacks, possibly from the same person under various guises. See: Anna May Wong History. FWiW, could there be a period of protection established for this article? Bzuk (talk) 19:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC).[reply]

    Comment: this is today's main page article and I think the vandalism will die down in a day or two. --Jh12 (talk) 19:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It now has semi-protection. I did not realize it was on the main page as the article all of sudden, received attention from a large number of anons and even some "taggers" like R.A.N. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC).[reply]
    Semi-protected for one week by User:Kafziel. Tan ǀ 39 20:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Edits by an anon ip user who has been banned, but keeps reappearing on a different ip, making the exact same non NPOV edits on the article. Knowledgeum (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for one week. Tan ǀ 39 21:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Edits by an anon ip user who has been banned, but keeps reappearing on a different ip, making the exact same non NPOV edits on the article. Knowledgeum (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for one week. Tan ǀ 39 21:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Edits by an anon ip user who has been banned, but keeps reappearing on a different ip, making the exact same non NPOV edits on the article. Knowledgeum (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for one week. Tan ǀ 39 21:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Edits by an anon ip user who has been banned, but keeps reappearing on a different ip, making the exact same non NPOV edits on the article. Knowledgeum (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for one week. Tan ǀ 39 21:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Edits by an anon ip user who has been banned, but keeps reappearing on a different ip, making the exact same non NPOV edits on the article. Knowledgeum (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for one week. Tan ǀ 39 21:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite full protection. High-risk template for Wikipedia:WikiProject California: currently on 14,592 articles. There was a minor edit war over the image used by the project. I have clarified the situation and if consensus is developed for a change, {{editprotected}} can always be used in the future. Either way, I believe this high-risk should always be permanently protected given its high profile. Users should not be able to edit and revert it without discussion. --Jh12 (talk) 18:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected indefinitely. Tan ǀ 39 20:33, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite full protection. High-risk template for Wikipedia:WikiProject Southern California: currently on 1,511 articles and has the same image representing WikiProject California. --Jh12 (talk) 18:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected indefinitely. Tan ǀ 39 20:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection please Also, I suppose there is no way for a non administrator to automatically semi-protect their own page, correct? NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 18:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Done & no. Rudget 18:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect incessant updates from IP addresses that violate WP:CRYSTAL. Nadal is set to become World No. 1 on August 18, and until then it should not be updated. Maybe protect until that date? The page is also undergoing an overhaul. Yohan euan o4 (talk) 18:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected until August 18. Rudget 18:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect Extensive edit war today, largely by IPs that probably belong to the same user. JdeJ (talk) 18:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined for now, seems to be discussed on the talkpage. If it starts again, please relist it. Woody (talk) 20:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    full protection possibly abusive sock & topic banned user[1] make edit war by different ip and accounts. Manacpowers (talk) 17:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Woody (talk) 20:33, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection , Recent wave of vandalism from a dynamic IP range..Libs (talk) 16:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--chaser - t 18:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full-protection Currently subject to a MedCab case (which I am the mediator of can be found here) The article has been the subject of edit warring and content disputes. I think it would be good for all involved to give the editing of that article a break whilst we get the mediation rolling.   «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l»  (talk) 09:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Woody (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Repeated removal of cited information regarding support of the LTTE, by multiple anonymous IP addresses and users[2],[3] who have made few or no edits outside the topic Kerr avon (talk) 08:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. I semi-protected due to concern about insertion of similar information, not due to removal. I'm not sure about the material that Kerr avon wants inserted, but that issue seems to have died down.--chaser - t 18:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. In the attempt to preserve information, I have added comments regarding footnote number 6. There is not evidence that it is relevant. If my comments are not protected, I will simply delete the footnote, since the book says nothing about universal suffrage. If someone can give me a page number, I will gladly stand corrected. The author of the book is Rummel. 128.59.143.41 (talk) 00:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Page 11, but I guess you know that already given as you can easily check that on google books. But please protect the page so that this anynomous ip cannot continue to vandalize the article with his personal commentary. Novidmarana (talk) 01:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm confused. A) an anon wants semi-protection; and B) the dispute seems to be over. Page 11 seemed to be the missing piece. This is a content dispute at any rate, so I'm thinking RFPP isn't the correct venue. Xavexgoem (talk) 02:00, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Woody (talk) 20:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection – Talkingturkey and an anonymous editor at 68.9.119.150 (possibly the same person) have been repeatedly deleting referenced information and a freely-licensed image from the article, and refuse to discuss the matter on the article's talk page despite requests. — Cheers, Truth's Out There –talk– 15:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Seems to have stopped now. Woody (talk) 20:28, 3 August 2008 (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.

    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, Repeated edit-warring involving a small group of editors. .Enigma message 06:50, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected --PeaceNT (talk) 15:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-Protect Repaeated vandalism by IPs when reverting vandalism. Thanks - Sorfane 11:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Just ask if you want the page unprotected. Camaron | Chris (talk) 11:10, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Unprotection requested no vandalism history for this article noticed (perhaps under a past title?). Protonk (talk) 17:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already unprotected. It's not protected, it just had a template on it (I've removed it). Someone will have to do the archiving honors, I'm not familiar with the archiving methods on this page. --barneca (talk) 17:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protect. Incorrect content added by IP numbers. Several times in the last day, information relating to the recent stabbing in Canada on a Greyhound Canada bus has been added to the Greyhound Lines page rather than the Greyhound Canada where it belongs. It's been removed several times and a request was made that people discuss on the talk page rather than restoring. However not one person has commented on the talk page, yet the text keeps getting restored by different IPs. Others deleted earlier, but I can't delete again with a 3RR. Nfitz (talk) 05:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 72 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The purpose of semi-protection is not to force anons out of content disputes between anon and registered users. If 3RR would apply to the reverts, it should be full protected. Mr.Z-man 06:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Question: I don't think there's any indication of a content dispute. None of the IPs came back and did it again. Each seemed to me to be different IP editors, tainted by WP:RECENTISM, ignorant of the corporate structure, doing the same thing independently and not bothering to read the talk page. Can you please semi-protect instead. Nfitz (talk) 07:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    If its not vandalism, it shouldn't get semi-protection. At least 1 anon has gone to the talk page. It looks like an edit war over content to me. Recentism is not vandalism. Mr.Z-man 16:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary full protection Dispute, Edit-warring back and forth on this article. Can an administrator please either protect the page or resolve it some other way? .Enigma message 05:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mr.Z-man 05:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, IP editor from various IPs has been trying to add a block of text about Ultimate Frisbee for some time, I have actually worked to include the text but the editor now seems bent on some kind of WP:POINT and is now removing valid references etc..Mfield (talk) 04:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection Not sure how Huggle is supposed to help, but there's a lot of disruption for one day. MMetro (talk) 04:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It's one spat of vandalism by two IP's. Revert, and we'll block if needed. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection. IPs keep addiding unsourced info, adding rumors, and their is IP vandalism. BlueRed 02:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - see how that goes. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 04:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    full protection Dispute.NonvocalScream (talk) 03:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for 36 hours. I agree, heated dispute. Try to get them to take it to the talk page. Tan ǀ 39 03:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection required to stop IP vandals who have been consistently vandalising the page for a considerable period of time. Numerous IPs have been used thus making the warning system rather redundant so the only way to stop would be to prevent IPs from editing the page. Could someone also please removed the most recent vandalism because I am in danger of 3RR : ). Crickettragic (talk) 02:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Tan ǀ 39 03:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semiprotection. Article is under attack of banned User:PaxEquilibrium. Only in last 2 days he has created 6 puppets for editing and I am asking that this and other articles are protected--Rjecina (talk) 17:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. CIreland (talk) 03:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semiprotection. Article is under attack of banned User:PaxEquilibrium. Only in last 2 days he has created 6 puppets for editing and I am asking that this and other articles are protected.--Rjecina (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 1 week. CIreland (talk) 03:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semiprotection. Article is under attack of banned User:PaxEquilibrium. Only in last 2 days he has created 6 puppets for editing and I am asking that this and other articles are protected.--Rjecina (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. CIreland (talk) 03:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semiprotection. Article is under attack of banned User:PaxEquilibrium. Only in last 2 days he has created 6 puppets for editing and I am asking that this and other articles are protected.--Rjecina (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. CIreland (talk) 03:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semiprotection. Article is under attack of banned User:PaxEquilibrium. Only in last 2 days he has created 6 puppets for editing and I am asking that this and other articles are protected.--Rjecina (talk) 17:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 1 week. CIreland (talk) 03:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=229670324"