Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

"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.

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

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.

Business Plot (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full Protection. Content dispute over content, 1,186 words were deleted today. Thank you. Ikip (talk) 06:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Fig (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect for at least 1 month. IPs have repeatedly made this a page for a Filipino indie band, which had been deleted before. Check the history of Fig (band). If possible, a history merge would be useful. Tealwisp (talk) 06:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Taekwondo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect, perhaps indefinitely. This article has long been subject to frequent vandalism, but in particular, it has recently been subjected to repeated questionable edits by Worldtaekwondofederation (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks); this user was blocked from editing for a 24-hour period on 28 January, and then blocked indefinitely on 17 February. Now, the same edits that this user repeatedly made are coming from 196.217.97.25 and 196.217.58.112. However, this single user is not the sole reason for this request; the page has frequently been vandalized from various other IP addresses as well, especially in the last month or so. Naturally, useful edits can certainly come from anonymous editors; but given the history of this particular article, I believe it could be better overall for it to be edited only by established editors. Omnedon (talk) 06:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

St. John's University (Jamaica, NY) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi or Full Protection. An intial content dispute has now snowballed into an anon user (208.120.47.96) deleting various information without discussion. I tried to have a discussion and solving it by going here:[1] and the anon user's talk page: [2] but he has ignored both avenues and simply reverts and now is deleting various sourced information. NyRoc (talk) 05:05, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Suge Knight (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Long term to indef semi protection I'm no fan of this guy either, but throughout this article's history, anon IP users have added accusations involving the murders of Tupac Shakur and Notorious B.I.G. Knight was never charged, let alone convicted, in connection with those murders, so it's pretty big BLP issue. Lately it's been pretty much every day, and sometimes multiple things are added and BLP problems "slip through the cracks." Beeblebrox (talk) 05:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Kelly Pavlik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism by IP´s -- Elentiras

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck _° is a silly pudding 04:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

List of micronations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism by IP´s and newly founded accounts. --Yopie 03:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Analogy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Velho (talk) 03:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 03:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

David W. Butler High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism.  Doulos Christos ♥ talk  03:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. rootology (C)(T) 03:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

La Revolución (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Constant reverting of edits to unconstruction version of article, using un-reliable sources cited on the article regarding an album. El cangri386 ^{Sign! or Talk} 02:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. I can't read Spanish to judge the value of the source, but this appears to be a content dispute, and semi-protection is never allowed to give more authority/weight in content disputes between IPs and logged in users. Please consider discussing it with the IP or taking it up the dispute resolution chain. rootology (C)(T) 02:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

The IP is continuing to constantly revert my edits regarding deletion of unreliable sources that were cited on the article. Reasoning on the IP's talk page hasn't worked and no reply was placed on mine or the IP's talk page. (The sources that were cited are from a Wiki/Blog site at Wikiton.net.) El cangri386 ^{Sign! or Talk} 05:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Stewart's Shops (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Staffwaterboy ^{Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments} 02:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. It was all just one IP, blocked 31 hours. rootology (C)(T) 02:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Fl0w (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism./Or Edit war Staffwaterboy ^{Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments} 02:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. rootology (C)(T) 02:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

ICarly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. -- Mentifisto 01:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Too Beautiful to Live (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite full protection dispute, The user "Lew19" has recently made wholesale undos to remove sourced, controversial statements and revert the page to unsourced statements without discussion or explanation. Lew19's profile and history indicates he is a member of the fan club of the article topic so may have institutional bias. Further, there is a possibility the topic of this article has made an on-air or other appeal, implicit or implied, to "defend" him. Thanks.

Declined, the user made only a single edit to the article SoWhy 15:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• Since the original request for protection, multiple new users have registered new accounts and removed all sourced, controversial statements. Article, which formerly had 23 citations, now has 1 and reads as a fan club entry. Topic of this article, host of a radio show, may have broadcast an on-air appeal for his listeners to "patrol" his wikipedia page. These mystery, "new" users - in their edits - have said that placing unflattering statements about the topic of a wikipedia article in the topic's entry constitute "vandalism" and "trolling." I could be wrong but I don't think that's the case - but I'm not as well-versed in wikipedia as some. Anyway, not sure what the benefit of protecting it at this point is, though, as it's just back to being a fan club article, but FYI. User:NotabilityPatrol

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Agree, the latter edits are concerning, they seem to have removed large amounts of critical sections. SoWhy 22:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks very much. Is there anyway to undo the extreme vandalism done to the page? They made such good work of it that it's almost impossible to recreate with a simple undo and, as it stands, the topic of this article got his way in having an unsourced, fan club article about him. Frankly, I'm not even certain if that article should exist at all - unfortunately, the last time I nominated it for deletion, the fan club came in an deleted my nominated for deletion tags so I guess we're stuck with it forever. User talk:Notabilitypatrol

Kama Sutra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Vandalism virtually every day by different IPs. The content makes it a bit of a target. Estimate less than 5% good edits (by IP) over last month. Ronhjones (talk) 00:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Yellowknife (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect for one week. High level of IP vandalism. YK Times^talk 00:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. This was happening principally 48 or so hours ago. If it picks up, please relist. rootology (C)(T) 02:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Billie Joe Armstrong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary Semi-Protection Very heavy recent IP vandalism. LittleMountain5 23:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 23:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Staffwaterboy/statustemplate (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite full-protectionJust a template for my status that will not need to be changed Staffwaterboy ^{Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments} 22:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Done –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

University of California, Riverside‎ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Request semi-protection due to heavy anonymous vandalism. --ElKevbo (talk) 22:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

–Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Dog (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite semi-protection - The experiment of removing the semiprotection which this article's had for over a year has failed. The article's now being vandalized on a pretty regular basis by IPs and newly created accounts - it seems that the article just gets too much "drive-by" vandalism to make unprotection viable. Zetawoof_(ζ) 22:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 22:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Mwahcysl (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite full-protection, vandalism. Userpage of an indefinitely blocked user which was recently vandalized by said user (see edits here). TheLetterM (talk) 22:08, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. - Vandal indef-ed for sockpuppetry. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 22:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Janis Joplin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection, vandalism. This article was mentioned on 30 Rock in January regarding vandalizing it. It was semi-protected to stop the vandalism. The episode was rerun Thursday and the page was again semi-protected, but only for 2 days. The protection expired today and vandalism has returned. Could this please be semi-protected longer until the spree dies down, perhaps a week? Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Skier Dude (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Duloxetine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Appears to be a low grade edit war involving the wording of the Duloxetine page opening paragraph.

Declined, let's see if it really does and re-request again if so. At the moment I don't think protection is needed. SoWhy 22:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Slipknot (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Constant vandalism... it would be appreciated if we could have a permanent protection because whenever it gets unprotected it's just hard to keep up with the edits. REZTER ^TALK ø 19:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Chris Buttars (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Also West Ridge Academy and Utah Boys Ranch (a redirect to the former)

Semi-protect. Due to recent negative publicity, this page high level of IP vandalism, POV, and BLP infractions. A specific anon role account has been edit warring and refusing to use the talk page, though other anons have been inserting POV. R. fiend (talk) 18:55, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. caknuck _° is a silly pudding 04:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Fox News Channel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite move-protection, recent page-move vandalism is second time ever; unlikely this page needs to be renamed in the near future. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Done –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, A lot of recent anon vandalism. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 18:28, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. rootology (C)(T) 18:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

move-protection, High-visibility page with no reason to be moved. Jonathan321 (talk) 17:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined, No history of moves, protection is not preemptive. -Royalguard11(T) 18:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

BJ Penn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection, vandalism, Was granted semi-protection a few weeks ago, that expired and vandalism returns. Multiple times per day, always by ip (non users). Some of these anonymous vandals have histories of vandalism. --Floodo1 (talk) 15:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Stephen Fry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection, vandalism, Quite a lot of reverting/undo is having to take place due to a range of anon ip vandalism, some are even reverting edits that have removed vandalism. --Uksam88 (talk) 15:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Already done. by Maxim (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Camaron | Chris (talk) 16:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Dominic Scott Kay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection vandalism, Most of the recent editing has been disruption by sockpuppets adding non-notable "best friend". —Snigbrook 15:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of five days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Maxim_(talk) 15:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Operation Opera (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Just need protection for a day or two from an anon IP insisting on adding his WP:OR about an Egyptian conspiracy theory into the article. THF (talk) 14:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined, always the same IP, warn and/or report for blocking instead. SoWhy 15:09, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Guitar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, repeated vandalism. Pontificalibus (talk) 14:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Aitias // discussion 14:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Spanish Empire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Repeated reversions coming from anon IP in Madrid, I suspect from User:Cosialscastells who was permanently blocked but who has been returning as anon IPs (in Madrid) to continue editing. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick ^t 14:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 15:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Portal:Current events/Calendar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

semi-protection high-visiblity template, Would like to protect from possible vandalism. Consult with User:Capitalistroadster and User:Tariqabjotu, both of whom are familiar with the item in its previous form, and how it is employed. Note that this subpage of the Current events Portal uses self-updating, i.e., "live" transclusion, as does the main portal page, on a 24-hour basis, both in the visible area and the area. It behaves like a template, though it's not in the Template space.

Please limit protection to established users, including this author/editor: User:Schweiwikist, and the previously-named editor and admin above. Thanks. Schweiwikist (talk) 10:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected. SoWhy 15:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Bhimsen Joshi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protection disruption Can someone look at here. some user is repeatedly adding unrelated language script . please protect the page, so he will start discussion in article talkpageC21K^talk 09:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. courtesy of Deacon_of_Pndapetzim. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 13:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Creation according to Genesis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection vandalism, This is ongoing. Ben (talk) 08:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 09:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Rock Lee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi protect apparent sock or meatpuppetry going on here. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Ruslik (talk) 09:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

The Legend of Spyro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite Full protect on above article as well as The Legend of Spyro: A New Beginning, The Legend of Spyro: The Eternal Night, The Legend of Spyro: Dawn of the Dragon, and Spyro (series) to prevent an edit war until a consensus is reached on a very disruptive issue.

Fully protected all until dispute ends. Be aware that if you *don't* seek consensus, and instead show contempt for the process, you give admins every right to revert your edits as vandalism. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Dittobori)} 06:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Drmies (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protect. IP vandalism by 68.101.104.146.

Declined. The user can request protection if he feels it is necessary. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 06:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. for a week; it appears to be static. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Dittobori)} 06:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Sleeved blanket (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection. Approximately 29 out of 59 in the last month have been blatant vandalism from IPs or reverts of the same, not counting contiguous edits by the same user. Much of this vandalism has been in the last week. Theymos (talk) 05:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 06:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Philippines (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite semi-protection vandalism. Changes made by a varying range of IPs. Also, many (similar) wholesale changes by users "AlvarezQz" and "$antander" (from October '08 to January '09) done within the past year. Contributions of said users seem to be good-faith, but also seem to be edit warring with anyone else who tries to contribute to the article (WP:OWN?). Also a frequent target for blocked user "Richard Relucio" who has created multiple sockpuppets. The article is rarely edited by established users. Mk32 (talk) 02:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik (talk) 10:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Kairo A.davis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite create-protection, same story as Kairo davis. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 02:09, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined. Only been deleted twice. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

The Clique series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Getting a lot of vandalism by widely varying range of IPs lately. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

John Decyk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Or just close the AFD and delete. --aktsu ^(t / c) 23:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Already protected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Nick Westerman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Fully protected. Salting requested. Has now been speedied 4 times in 2 days. Smile a While (talk) 22:44, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Creation protected Tiptoety ^talk 02:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Jamaica (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 22:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Anesthesia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite full protection dispute, Hi there mods.

The user "Riffington" has recently all of the sudden shown up and started editing the Nurse Anesthesia section of the Anesthesia wiki. He is placing political organization 'talking points' (the ASA) as fact and changing the section which has been trouble free now for almost a year since i was assigned to monitor it. There have been disputes in the past and this was decided upon as it is.

Please intervene. thanks. . Mmackinnon (talk) 22:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Fully protected for six months. Talk it out. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Dittobori)} 03:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Po (Teletubbies) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Regular target of banned user User:Bambifan101 socks. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined, looks like a content dispute and not vandalism. Also, only one IP today, so blocking should be sought instead. SoWhy 21:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

• Well, it's not a content dispute, although I can understand why it may look like that to the casual observer. This IP user is banned, so any edit they make is revertable on sight. I did get them blocked, but they'll probably be back tomorrow from another IP. My goal is to take away his favorite articles so he has nowhere to "play" Beeblebrox (talk) 04:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Current requests for unprotection

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.

USS Connecticut (BB-18) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Edit Unprotection only, keep move protection, This is Today's featured article, per Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection, the TFA should only be protected for short periods, not for long durations such as the current 6 hours. There is a discussion on the talk page, and even though I am a sysop, I will not undo an admin action from a fellow MILHIST coordinator. -MBK₀₀₄ 04:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Done per consensus at talk page. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 05:48, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Staffwaterboy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Unprotection, i wanna see what the lovely vandal's gotta say. Staffwaterboy ^{Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments} 03:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Unprotected caknuck _° is a silly pudding 04:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Fatimah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The page was protected by an administrator involved in the issue surrounding the article since 2006. Sunni editors, namely User:AA and User:Itaqallah, have been removing large amounts of heavily referenced material representing the Shi'a Muslim view concerning the death of a historical figure central to Shi'a Islam. Other than protecting the page to prevent reinsertion of sourced material, the fact that the admin is a main party in the dispute represents another misuse of administrative tools.

Declined. Uh, no. Tan | 39 16:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Paroxetine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Why is this page protected? The Admin has not responded to requests to justify his actions. See the talk page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.179.168 (talk)

Apparently several IP's (no checkuser done to determine how many people are actually involved) (User:161.150.2.55 User:r 68.59.174.163 User:71.244.121.113 User:67.133.55.18 User:67.186.139.36 User:99.246.185.140 User:69.243.189.111- several of which are SPA's ) - are not using the talk page to come to a consensus on an apparently controversial subject (or interpretation of data), are including what others, who I presume are more knowledgeable on the subject, consider original research (under the same guise of data interpretation), making small but apparently significant changes in wording... There was an earlier warning on the talk page (17:14, 7 February 2009 (UTC)) about the edit warring going on and rootology did warn all involved that the "protections will likely grow in duration, and then no one will be able to unfortunately edit this page." Given the sensitive nature of the topic, I chose to semi-protect rather than return to full protection - I have no qualms if an admin chooses to "up" the protection to force all parties to go to the talk page first, but feel very uncomfortable in taking all protection off as the parties have shown that discussion/consensus on the talk page historically hasn't been working. See my talk page archive for additional information - I'll move that over to the article talk page as well. Skier Dude (talk) 15:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Not unprotected Per above for bot. Camaron | Chris (talk) 16:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Nurse practitioner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This page is semi-protected because of "vandalism" but if you look at the revision history, it's just a back-and-forth between some people who insist on saying the NP is a mid-level provider, and others who insist on deleting it. This is ridiculous and prevents the rest of us from fixing typos, etc. Topics that are a lot less controversial are unprotected and they cope with it quite professionally. Just open this page up and make a section called controversies, and say that some groups like the AMA refer to NPs as mid-level providers, while other groups like the ANA emphasize the independence of NPs. 71.242.234.90 (talk) 23:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)Denise

Fixed to point to correct article rather than redirect. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Dittobori)} 03:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

 Administrator note Please contact the protecting administrator, MastCell (talk · contribs), first. Regards SoWhy 15:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Current requests for edits to a protected page

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

The Game (mind game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I would like to request unprotection of "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_(mind_game)" I would like to contribute/add to it if possible. Thank you--Anik C (talk) 19:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined. This is only semi-protected and is the target of heavy vandalism. If you wait a day or two, you will be a confirmed user and will be allowed to edit semi-protected pages. Tan | 39 19:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

War in Afghanistan (2001-present) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Requesting long term semi-protection, article is vandalized too many times because it's about current war. Because of the vandalism, article is now not able to give good information and facts, one doesn't know what's true and what's nonsense. --Novis-M (talk) 22:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Iraq War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Requesting long term semi-protection, article is vandalized too many times because it's about current war. Because of the vandalism, article is now not able to give good information and facts, one doesn't know what's true and what's nonsense. --Novis-M (talk) 22:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Kitten (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Long term to permanent Semi-protection. High risk article with long history of IP vandalism. Spiesr (talk) 20:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Taylor Fawcett (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection vandalism, High levels of IP vandalism. TNXMan 20:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 20:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Eagle Rock, Los Angeles, California (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, A sock is trying to remove gang activity information from this page, please protect from IP sock editing for a few days. Thanks in advance, Timmccloud (talk) 20:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC). Timmccloud (talk) 20:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 20:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Black History Month (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, February is black history moth and heavy traffic from IP vandals has no stop in a while. J.Mundo (talk) 19:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 19:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

List of largest United States university campuses by enrollment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection, I am requesting partial page protection for this article. There is an anonymous editor who appears to not fully understand Wikipedia's policies and is blindly reverting edits from me and other editors. The edit summaries don't seem to make a ton of sense, and the anon editor is claiming that me (and others) are in violation of the 3RR because we are trying to keep the page consistent. I request an admin check in and intervene. Nick^talk 19:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

This user has already been reported for 3rr violations. [3] I have requested multiple times that he bring things to the talk page before changing the critrea for what belongs on the page and does not. Example is he added that fully accredited online schools should not be included and this is not within the boundries of the article's titles but something he just came up with. [4] I feel is should be discussed. 208.120.47.96 (talk) 19:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Note: Revoke request, There are now several editors involved in the discussion and it appears anon editor has stopped reverting. -Nick^talk 21:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined (Tagging for archive bot) -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Dittobori)} 03:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Gator fishing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite create-protection, The page has been deleted 3 times in one day. Maybe we should protect it. Cssiitcic (talk) 18:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Already protected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:54, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite semi-protection, The LTTE is in the news a lot these days and is currently the top story on BBC News. The article has been continuously vandalized over the last few months, and long term I think semi-protection seems required.

Also see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation#LTTE article. snowolfD4 ^{( talk / @ )} 18:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Survival of the fittest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Continued vandalism from anonymous ip addresses. Woland (talk) 16:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Cell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Anything considerable amounts of vandalism. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Abraham Pinter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

full-protect. major vanadalism whole page deleted by ip user 86.138.239.128

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. No need for full protection as it just seems to be dynamic IPs causing the issue. Camaron | Chris (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Radar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, A ridiculous amount of vandalism from many different IP addresses. I can't get the page to rollback correctly either. miquonranger03 (talk) 15:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for three days. Tan | 39 16:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

User:astatine-210 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protectin Seeing that I revert a lot of IP vandalism, I want to protect my user page before it starts. α§ʈάt̪íňέ-210 ^{discovered elements ∞ what am I?} 14:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

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

full protection user talk of blocked user, Perma-blocked user abusing help template on his talk page. Please protect or extend block to include his own talk page -- and ditto his third sock, User:Matt72in. --EEMIV (talk) 11:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Done Block altered to disable user talk page editing. Camaron | Chris (talk) 12:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:Central America topic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection editwar. This template has being going back and forward for a while now, there is an IP that insists in putting Mexico in Central America even though this issue has been solved before with previous users in the same template, so there are constant revertions being done to the article, and I think the best would be to semi-protect it for maybe 2 months, to hopely stop this war. Supaman89 (talk) 22:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Please answer this petition. Supaman89 (talk) 02:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined, it's always the same IP, I warned it to stop. If it continues, warn and/or report for block at WP:AIV. SoWhy 09:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and rightly so. Also, please caution the petitioner to justify why they and allied parties choose to suppress what is already in the article. There's a reason why it's called an edit war: because two editors in particular continue to revert (Supaman89 and Jcmenal). They keep mentioning that there are discussions and a consensus to justify their position, but fail to produce. There is certainly no discussion on the template talk page. Simply read the article and notes. 69.158.144.231 (talk) 10:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Crusading for The Truth™ isn't gonna help your case whatsoever, 69. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Dittobori)} 06:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Abraham Pinter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. consistent vandalism with malicious unsourced revisions. It is now being vandalise almost on a daily basis which suggests a personal vendeta.Breuerman (talk) 08:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 09:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Black panther (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Warrington (talk) 09:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 09:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Sloth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect.High level of IP vandalism. Warrington (talk) 09:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 09:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Christian Bale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism and reversion. Edit warring beginning to take place. White43 (talk) 08:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Fully protected. Not vandalism but content dispute. Open mediation case indicates that there is no consensus. SoWhy 09:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Adverse effects of fluoroquinolones (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full-protect please. The article "Fluoroquinolone toxicity" has been heavily expanded by an editor with a conflict of interest. Several longstanding editors from WikiProject Medicine and WikiProject Pharmacology have raised concerns about the quality and reliability of information. Doc James has kindly re-written the article using reliable sources at "Adverse effects of fluoroquinolones".Axl ¤ [Talk] 07:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined, I see no reason to protect this article. If there is a problem with a single editor's contribution, the correct way is to block this user if needed. SoWhy 09:44, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Menachem Begin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Several IPs try to insert a bogus and libelous quote, which was established on the talk page as fake. This is an ongoing thing, so I think a long-term protection is needed. Nudve (talk) 07:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 09:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Percival Davis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Protect Article is undergoing repeated attempts for release of personal information that is 1. Personal -and/or- 2. Unsubstantiated -and/or- 3. Malicious. This war began due to user Orlady bearing a grudge against another user who disagreed with her about a separate article. Orlady has now followed user to this particular article, and is attempting to revert edits in revenge. This is causing an innocent third party (Percival Davis) to suffer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Audreetucker (talk • contribs) 04:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Far be it from me to guess why Audreetucker has been repeatedly removing this article from Category:Living people (one of the several deletions that were made in a series of unexplained edits), if this user's objective is to protect Mr. Davis' privacy as a living person. --Orlady (talk) 05:21, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. by Kevin (talk · contribs). SoWhy 09:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)