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
Reswobslc (talk | contribs)
3,364 edits
Spam
Line 17: Line 17:
==Current requests for protection==
==Current requests for protection==
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}

===={{la|Reverse funnel system}}====
'''Indefinite protect as a redirect to [[Pyramid scheme]]'''. Persistent spammer re-posting pyramid scheme nonsense here. Although the "article" and the links given as references purport to criticize the pyramid scheme in question, all of them do so in order to promote a ''different'' pyramid scheme. [[User:Reswobslc|Reswobslc]] ([[User talk:Reswobslc|talk]]) 15:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
:{{RFPP|nea}} Content disputes are not resolved by reverting to a particular version one side likes then fully protecting the page. Continue to discuss the issue on the talk page; if that does not work pursue [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]] such as [[WP:3O|third opinion]]. [[User:Camaron|Camaron | Chris]] <small>[[User talk:Camaron|(talk)]]</small> 20:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
::I did not think that reporting spam constituted a content dispute. It is my understanding that spam is unwelcome on Wikipedia ([[WP:SPAM]]). It is my understanding that external links to web pages promoting get-rich-quick schemes are spam. If you are truly suggesting that I should involve dispute resolution to debate whether an obvious spam article belongs on Wikipedia, I won't bother. The spam can stay. [[User:Reswobslc|Reswobslc]] ([[User talk:Reswobslc|talk]]) 07:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


===={{la|Community Reinvestment Act}}====
===={{la|Community Reinvestment Act}}====

Revision as of 07:14, 30 September 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

    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 protect as a redirect to Pyramid scheme. Persistent spammer re-posting pyramid scheme nonsense here. Although the "article" and the links given as references purport to criticize the pyramid scheme in question, all of them do so in order to promote a different pyramid scheme. Reswobslc (talk) 15:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Content disputes are not resolved by reverting to a particular version one side likes then fully protecting the page. Continue to discuss the issue on the talk page; if that does not work pursue dispute resolution such as third opinion. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I did not think that reporting spam constituted a content dispute. It is my understanding that spam is unwelcome on Wikipedia (WP:SPAM). It is my understanding that external links to web pages promoting get-rich-quick schemes are spam. If you are truly suggesting that I should involve dispute resolution to debate whether an obvious spam article belongs on Wikipedia, I won't bother. The spam can stay. Reswobslc (talk) 07:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection for 1 month. Page has been experiencing vandalism and 'drive-by' inflammatory near libelous edits (breaking WP:BLP rules). Increased attention probably due to '08 Elections, and use of issue by some political attack ads. Nearly all troublesome edits are from anonymous IPs. lk (talk) 06:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite create-protection , Multiple re-creations of the exact same article. Completely non notable band. .Undead Warrior (talk) 06:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protection, its page history are either all RVs or intentional vandalism by unknown IPs. WinterSpw (talk) 06:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite create-protection , Looks like a teacher has maybe challenged his class to create an article on this non-notable housing development. Already speedied twice in the last week..Beeblebrox (talk) 05:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 05:35, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection - Multiple counts of unknown IP vandalism over the past couple weeks. SE KinG (talk) 04:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 wheels, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 05:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi protection, article has been under a barrage of IP vandalism from what appears to be an editor operating on an IP range. Semi-protect until they get bored. McJeff (talk) 04:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 04:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    full move protection, restore move protection after it previous protection expired. Article was targeted by User:Grawp. Cunard (talk) 03:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Move protected Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 04:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection , There's a couple of IP's roaming in and out the Xbox Live article and keeps changing information, this all mostly gets reverted..RkOrToN 03:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 04:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi protect to cool down vandalism. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    full move protection no need to be moved after being repeatedly move vandalized. Cunard (talk) 02:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Done bibliomaniac15 02:18, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    full create protection repeated recreation by Chinese users who believe that this is the sandbox. 沙盒 means "sandbox" on the Chinese Wikipedia. Cunard (talk) 02:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined I did, however, redirect the page to the sandbox instead. If they continue, I'll protect the redirect. -Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 02:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, This template is the frequent victim of vandalism from a range of IP editors. No IP editor has made more than 2 or 3 instances of vandalism, so blocking the IP isn't going to be a successful strategy for dealing with this recurring vandalism..— [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 01:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

    Semi-protected for 1 month. bibliomaniac15 02:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Lots of IP vandalism due to recent events. --Loonymonkey (talk) 01:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected by User:Jj137 for a period of 1 week. After this time, the page will automatically become unprotected. NuclearWarfare contact meMy work 03:00, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism.LAAFansign review 01:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 04:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Recent vandalism by all sorts of IP's and registered users. Last 50 edits are all vandalism or reverts. Semi-protection for 2 weeks..Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 01:00, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. Malinaccier (talk) 01:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    No. Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 01:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected. All set now. EdJohnston (talk) 01:47, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi protect, repeatedly being hit by IPs. Corvus cornixtalk 00:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for two weeks. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 01:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite Semi Since the previous protection was removed, consistent IP disruption have been evident on the article's history. I ask for indefinite semi since this will be the 31st time this page had to be semi-protected ([1]) since it was created; and there is no evidence that the vandalism and disruption is going away. --haha169 (talk) 00:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection - currently undergoing massive IP vandalism. Bart133 t c @ How's my driving? 00:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Also, requests go at the TOP of the old requests. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 00:55, 30 September 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.

    Unprotection requested for this article, as User:Alex Bakharev protected it after precisely two minor vandalism hits within the space of a minute ([2], [3]) on the article. The article was semi-protected for a month, which is extremely excessive given that the article doesn't attract much vandalism, and the vandal in question here stopped of their own volition after two warnings. Warren -talk- 04:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 04:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Please unprotect; was protected for the duration of the block discussion. User has since been unblocked and is allowed to edit userspace. Thank you. Giggy (talk) 03:45, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Tiptoety talk 03:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for 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

    Page was semi-protected for a while and the protection was lifted 08/15/08. Since then several edits were made to add the same un-notable "official songs of Memphis". Always the same content, always by an anonymous editor, very likely done by the person mentioned in the edits. That person has quite some patience and persistence. Page was then semi-protected for another week, starting Sept. 15th, and protection was once again lifted after that week. However, the persistant vandalism now continues, from the same person, from many IPs. Blocking them all is unfeasible. This person has attempted to add this material for over 2 years, and there was much debate about it with eventual community consensus that it was not-notable and failed WP:MUSIC/SONG. It now seems probable that he is using bots of some kind from several locations to keep re-adding the material. I request indefinite semi-protection for the page, to prevent anonymous editors from adding this material repeatedly. Thank you! -- Otto 18:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Normally, I'd decline this because of the sporadic nature of the vandalism; however, the really bizarre range of IPs vandalizing it seem to warrant special action. I've given it a two-week protection; if you'd like any more help, please feel free to come by my talk page. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 23:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, This article in particular is being targeted by the puppet of banned User:Nangparbat. Its really frustrating to see that this guy logging in with a different IP just 1 hour after his previous IP was blocked to further his POV edits in the India-Pakistan related articles. Thanks..Shovon (talk) 16:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • My edits on india pakistan related articles the administraters can look for themselves and see whos POV the longewala for example was full of shovons POV but now its reverted to a neutral point Shovon has a habbit of making minor issues like a few sentences on PAK article a big issue he needs to be disciplined in how to use wikipedia there have been several editors who have cleared me of any POV and hes the only one ranting and shouting about him i suggest blocking him 86.153.131.193 (talk) 16:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined Blocked offending user instead. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 23:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection – this template was fully protected during a dispute between two admins (of whom I was one) in December 2007. The dispute seems to have died down now, and the current use of the template is not such that full protection would be justified of high-use grounds. It is currently used on about a thousand pages, and has potential to be used on more. For this reason, semi-protection rather than complete unprotection seems reasonable to me. Physchim62 (talk) 16:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Reduced to semi-protection. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 23:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-Protection. IP keeps on adding link to a Canadian network that airs the show, requesting protection so that this conflict will be resolved. Emarsee (Talk • Contribs) 22:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined I'd suggest that you talk to the IP, as he's willing to discuss the link's inclusion. Tell me how that goes; if you guys just end up edit warring I'll protect the page. Thanks, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 23:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Too much vandalism against me.... Idk how Grawp got into this.. and why it had to be me... Thanks. Also, protect my page, until I want it changed. Cheers! II MusLiM HyBRiD II 22:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC) P.S. Sorry about my mistake below. II MusLiM HyBRiD II 22:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Nvm, thanks Puppets. You got to my page before i posted this.. My mistakes. II MusLiM HyBRiD II 22:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected No problem. And in case you wonder why I keep adding icons, it's because the bot only archives if it sees an icon at the end (don't reply to this here because it'll confuse the bot :P). Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 23:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi protection soon as the article was unprotected, vandals began attacking it. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 22:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Long term vandalism after pp before. Thanks~ II MusLiM HyBRiD II 22:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Last edit was almost 4 days ago. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 22:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:II MusLiM HyBRiD II (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protect for a time. Too much vandalism against me.... Idk how Grawp got into this.. and why it had to be me... Thanks. Also, protect my page, until I want it changed. Cheers! II MusLiM HyBRiD II 22:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. It's been semi-protected since the 18th. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 22:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected Though I did place semiprotection on your userpage. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 22:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection , High amount of anonymous IPs adding incorrect information and original research.DiverseMentality(Discuss it) 21:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 22:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Could we protect this page for a week? Now that it's on ITN, we're getting a lot of vandalism..JaGatalk 21:35, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected., except only for a day... I'm discussing extending the protection with the protecting admin. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 22:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Continued vandalism and false information by IPs. Resumed after last protection wore off..DiverseMentality(Discuss it) 21:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 22:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protection: Numerous offensive and false additions over several months from users without accounts or not logged in as shown throughout edit history.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Superman7515 (talk • contribs)

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Seems to be manageable without protection at this time, please watchlist the page and revert inappropriate edits as necessary. Camaron | Chris (talk) 21:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Article already received vandalism yesterday as shown in edit history. Common sense would also indicate that Britney Spears is a high vandalism target..Ogioh (talk) 20:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Just going through the history again there's i don't know many vandalism edits I didn't notice. Ogioh (talk) 20:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected —αἰτίας •discussion• 20:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Please semi-protect this page. A bunch of IPs in two /8s, probably belonging to one person with a dynamic IP at two locations, have been persistently adding external links to a copyright-infringing ROM site. Talk:Nintendo DS homebrew explains the issue further. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 20:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Please protect to stop edit warring over focus city list and constant removal of dispute tags by users until a consensus has been reached. The debate is over the inclusion of Los Angeles as a secondary hub or focus city and the same debate over whether it has the title is occuring with the same people at Los Angeles International Airport and it is already locked. Thanks so much for your help in this matter. This will allow us to get past edit warring and resolved the issue with a consensus of more than one person. 96.5.66.240 (talk) 20:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite protect as a redirect to Pyramid scheme. Persistent spammer re-posting pyramid scheme nonsense here. Although the "article" and the links given as references purport to criticize the pyramid scheme in question, all of them do so in order to promote a different pyramid scheme. Reswobslc (talk) 15:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Content disputes are not resolved by reverting to a particular version one side likes then fully protecting the page. Continue to discuss the issue on the talk page; if that does not work pursue dispute resolution such as third opinion. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=241958486"