Wikipedia talk:Requests for page protection

Archives
March 2004 – December 2005 January 2006 - November 2006 December 2006 - June 2007 July 2007 - February 2008 March 2008 - August 2008

Header Level inconsistency

I was about to make a PP request, but got conflicting info on the main page about the syntax to do it with. The verbal description specifies a Level 4 header which would be 5 equals: =====. But the example provided shows only 4 equals, which is a Level 3. Most requests come in on a Lev.3, and I figure I'll just follow suit, but I'm here to suggest it be looked into by someone with Authoritah. -:-  AlpinWolf   -:- 11:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, I guess whoever wrote that meant "four ="-header. I fixed and clarified it in the header. Regards SoWhy 12:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

No. A Level 1 heading, which is the style for the title of a page and therefore is normally not used, is 1 = on each side. A Level 2 heading is 2 = on each side, and so on. I came here with a different question: Why does this page have Level 4 headings (4 =) immediately under Level 2 (2 =) headings, with no Level 3 (3 =) headings? By the way, heading and header do not mean the same thing. Finell (Talk) 21:43, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Response to my request for page protection for User:Netalarm

I'm aware that the IP responsible for the vandalism has been blocked, however the vandalism to the page was fairly extensive with the IP user vandalizing the page 22 times each one a few seconds after I reverted their edits clearly using automated software of some kind as it simply wouldn't be possible for anyone to type this fast [1]. The IP was only blocked for 24 hours and they could easily come back and continue to vandalize tomorrow. - Jeffrey Mall | Talk2Me | BNosey - 20:11, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Some help, please?

I can't handle all the RfPP requests for two days straight. Especially when I sign on this morning, I see someone is raising a stink about some tendentiously editing IP that got blocked last night. Enigma^msg 15:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

new mop on the block

I've been trying to handle some of this, I'm fairly confident in my knowledge of protection policy, but any and all feedback anyone has on my work here is welcome and appreciated. Thanks! Beeblebrox (talk) 20:25, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Your help is welcome. ;) Acalamari 20:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Instructions could be clearer.

I was looking to tell someone how to request salting. The first sentence of this page says:

This page is for requesting that a page, image or template be

• fully protected,
• semi-protected,
• move-protected or
• unprotected.

However, if you look at the list of protection options in WP:PP, it lists:

• Full protection
• Semi-protection
• Creation protection
• Move protection

When I compared the lists, I wondered if Creation Protection were handled elsewhere. I've been told that isn't the case, and it should be requested at this page. That makes sense, but I hope you can see why it isn't clear. I'm not comfortable simply editing a policy page in case there's a good reason it reads the way it does. I think the opening sentence should be edited to included "creation protected". Am I missing something?--SPhilbrickT 12:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for any confusion. You are perfectly free to add requests for create protection to this page, so I've clarified the header to avoid any future confusion. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.--SPhilbrickT 14:33, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Page Protection Query

I was looking at the Wikipedia Vandalism Page Protection page yesterday and I noticed that there were quite a lot of people refused page protection because the page hadn't been vandalised enough. For quite a few of the instances, I could've told the person that their request would be refused because of the amount of times the page had been vandalised. As normal editors, are we allowed to edit that page to add say the note template along with something along the lines of "this page has been vandalised twice within the last 24 hours". Are we allowed to do that or is this a page for the admins only? --5 albert square (talk) 11:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there is anything specifically saying you could not or should not do that, and it could help lower the admin workload here. However, I wouldn't advise it for anyone without a thorough understanding of the protection policy or who don't want a lot of user talk messages challenging their decisions. Beeblebrox (talk) 05:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

request

Hi I request a block on the Lee Corso page.SOme idiot was vandalising it. Also I request protection on kirk Herbstreit's page and Woody Paige's page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waleslittlehelper (talk • contribs) 03:16, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Not sure where to mention this

I requested full protection on Glenn Jacobs. I intended to request semi-protection and must have clicked the wrong option. Embarrassing. My mistake. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Happens all the time - and admin would have probably semi'd anyway. I've made the change here.  7  00:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Didn't want to edit it myself, wasn't sure if that was permitted. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

To all admins

Before you apply protection on a certain page, make sure the one who makes a request bothered to talk to the ones defacing that particular article. Protecting something should only be a last resort wherein editors stubbornly refuse to cease despite being told. 202.69.188.102 (talk) 23:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)