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
Fox News Channel
Line 8: Line 8:
==Current requests for protection==
==Current requests for protection==
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}

==== {{la|Fox News Channel}} ====
'''Indefinite protection''' Continuous vandalism....not that one minds, but still.... [[Special:Contributions/99.155.206.57|99.155.206.57]] ([[User talk:99.155.206.57|talk]]) 14:21, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

==== {{la|This Is War}} ====
==== {{la|This Is War}} ====
'''Semi protection''' ''dispute'', Continuous and apparently multiple IP vandals returning to revert the same things. Looks like it may be sock puppets because of the similarity of their senseless edits. Started up again not long after previous protection was completed. [[User:Kiac|<font color="orange">kiac.</font>]] <small><font color="green">([[User talk:Kiac|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Kiac|contrib]])</font></small> 12:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
'''Semi protection''' ''dispute'', Continuous and apparently multiple IP vandals returning to revert the same things. Looks like it may be sock puppets because of the similarity of their senseless edits. Started up again not long after previous protection was completed. [[User:Kiac|<font color="orange">kiac.</font>]] <small><font color="green">([[User talk:Kiac|talk]]-[[Special:Contributions/Kiac|contrib]])</font></small> 12:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:21, 30 December 2009


"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 protection Continuous vandalism....not that one minds, but still.... 99.155.206.57 (talk) 14:21, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi protection dispute, Continuous and apparently multiple IP vandals returning to revert the same things. Looks like it may be sock puppets because of the similarity of their senseless edits. Started up again not long after previous protection was completed. kiac. (talk-contrib) 12:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite create-protection, repeatedly re-created spam page. MuffledThud (talk) 11:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Who knows, in three months they may be notable.GedUK  13:28, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Temporary semi-protection, Need this IP address to leave me alone. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 08:53, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection - it's going to be a spam trap for the next week. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 05:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Already a lot of spamming, and only likely to increase. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 06:25, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 05:00, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week. Tiptoety talk 07:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection, protection expired yesterday; alteration of accurate information and general vandalism have returned. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 04:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. tedder (talk) 07:29, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection, People disagreeing over character name. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 04:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Question: why not provide a WP:RS of the actual character name? tedder (talk) 04:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Can't really source a name that's pronounced in a movie, its difficult to tell whether gray is part of the first or last name. DragonZero (talk · contribs) 07:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined, in that case, protection (especially semi-protection) is the wrong course of action, because it is essentially endorsing one name/pronunciation. There should be sources- for instance, imdb, the publisher, news articles, or things of that sort. In the meantime, don't edit war over it. tedder (talk) 07:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection, Spamming by Wallflowers98 socks, adding "4shared" links, although it's blacklisted, he's getting through by putting it in nowiki tags. Momo san Gespräch 04:29, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. No other articles are being targeted? tedder (talk) 04:36, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Give me a minute, I can look those up for you, but yes there are more. Momo san Gespräch 04:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Sent a message to your talk page regarding other pages. Momo san Gespräch 04:49, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: Just a note for posterity, this has been handled. tedder (talk) 07:25, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection, frequent/numerous forum-type quality edits resulting from new-user or IP edits. issue recognized by some editors (Editor: 86.22.230.56 Page Revision Description: Deleted a load of ranty, badly written, non-encyclopedic criticisms. The N97 might have many flaws and you might be irritated by it, but don't do this.) Temporary protection would reduce non-constructive criticisms until a time where issues with the page's subject is fixed (may seem too case-specific, but it is incorporating bias towards angry users, and is adding, as stated above, many poorly written criticisms. 6 month protection should be sufficient (yes, if it does get protected, it would need to be at the very least, 3 months). Viet|Pham (talk) 04:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Try communicating on the talk page and in edit summaries, give user warnings, etc. tedder (talk) 04:21, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection for a long time Continuous IP addition of WP:BADCHARTS, changing chart peaks, and adding Component charts. Total messing up of the page. --Legolas (talk2me) 04:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. tedder (talk) 04:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection, This is a subpage created by a user who is currently indefinitely blocked. It would seem this person has a lot of enemies and they are vandalizing his page while he is blocked. I'd normally say the page should be deleted, but I don't know its history, and there is a chance that some people might be reading it and/or making legitimate edits. (Note that there is currently no Charlie Zelenoff article on Wikipedia.) . Soap Talk/Contributions 03:06, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Done Meh. Invoking WP:IAR to delete this, especially since it was deleted as a questionable BLP issue. I'll watch and protect if necessary. If the user is unblocked I'll be happy to discuss recreation with them- but I'm worried it is cyberbullying. tedder (talk) 03:17, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite create-protection, repeatedly re-created attack page. MuffledThud (talk) 22:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected. Also salted Deborah Hirst. tedder (talk) 23:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi protection repeatedly being attacked by IP editors. Woogee (talk) 22:49, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. tedder (talk) 23:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection dispute, More climate change edit warring. . Off2riorob (talk) 22:46, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    It's just an SPA. He can be blocked and the problem will go away. Semiprotection would also work. --TS 22:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    But you are also a single propose account tony. Off2riorob (talk) 22:53, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    In a way, aren't we all? tedder (talk) 23:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. tedder (talk) 23:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection dispute, Climate change edit war. Off2riorob (talk) 22:11, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I posted this last night but the edit war continues after an editor was blocked. I've decided to post about it at WP:ANI. --TS 22:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Fully protected by Jayron32. NW (Talk) 23:06, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection vandalism, unsourced speculation/fancruft (Justinsane15 (talk) 21:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. See you in a week. tedder (talk) 22:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, a lot of vandalism by different IPs. Caltas (talk) 20:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I second this. (actually, most of these are students vandalizing from home out of boredom, i personally know people who do this). Many school pages need semi-protecting, ironically, from their own students. Viet|Pham (talk) 04:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --JForget 20:57, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism by IPs.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 20:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --JForget 21:00, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, deletion of content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ompuri1115 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Note that the user that made this request mostly did this, reverted and warned for making test edits. Momo san Gespräch 20:44, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined As stated above. --JForget 21:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Though if there is an edit war starting, it will have to be protected or one or more will be blocked. --JForget 21:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It appears he's using an IP sockpuppet for further disruption, i'll let it go from here. Momo san Gespräch 21:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry but i was just trying to fix it.72.187.149.41 (talk) 21:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Making test edits in the article is not a good idea. Please use the WP:Sandbox to test before placing anything in the article otherwise your edit tests will be perceived as vandalism. Momo san Gespräch 21:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, edit-warring from IP .  fetchcomms☛ 20:28, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Possibly 4chan, saying the word "meme". Momo san Gespräch 20:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Protected by User:Prodego --JForget 20:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I request short duration semi-protect for the article Adi Dharm. The single anonymous IP range vandal (geolocate is Kolkatta:India) is also commenting on my user-talk page. Annette46 (talk) 17:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Question: let me ask an ignorant question. Is this truly vandalism? Or just a difference in opinion? tedder (talk) 19:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Answer In my opinion (volunteered to provide context) the IP editor appeared to be confused between "Adi Dharm" (a religion which is not Hinduism) and "Ad Dharm" (which is a notified Scheduled Caste - like untouchable scavengers - in Hinduism). It is a not uncommon confusion. The IP editor did not attempte to engage in content dispute (if any) resolution with me, instead he/she left some more nonsense on my user-talk page. Repeatedly reinserting "nonsense" into an article and failing to give reasons for reverting or even discussing reversions, indicates a degree of vandalism - which my edit summaries sufficiently cautioned the IP editor against. If it was a difference in opinion then the IP editor must include his citations and references. Previously the IP range has been used to vandalise articles on Brahmo Samaj such as here [1] and also for vandalism like this [2] Annette46 (talk) 20:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Gotcha. Thanks for the context. tedder (talk) 22:02, 29 December 2009 (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, The page was semied over a year ago due to "fairly frequent" vandalism; it has scarcely been edited at all in that period... I think we could trial an unprotected version now!. ╟─TreasuryTag►duumvirate─╢ 09:55, 30 December 2009 (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

    Indefinite create-protection, Repeatedly recreated. . Unioneagle (talk) 19:48, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, User:Sarimnadeem, who was the only one who has created the page, has been blocked. Rjd0060 (talk) 20:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection Persistent vandalism has only begun. As you may recall from other reported baseball signings and trades, every anonymous user wants to be the one to break the news on Wikipedia, though the source of this signing himself said it won't be official until Monday or Tuesday of next week. Therefore, I'd like a one-week protection. --Muboshgu (talk) 19:31, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The context is much appreciated. tedder (talk) 19:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, persistent vandalism . Caltas (talk) 19:28, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. tedder (talk) 19:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism Repeated vandalised, with violations of WP:BLP - some of these comments are potentially libellous. Stormcloud (talk) 19:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Also, This is the first time I've asked for a semi-protect - can somebody check I've got the procedure right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by StormCloud (talk • contribs) 19:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The addition here is correct, but the number of vandalisms isn't high enough, nor do any recent edits by IPs appear to be far in violation of WP:BLP. Also, there are plenty of editors watching and reverting changes to the page. tedder (talk) 19:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for checking the procedure for me. I donn't agree with your conclusions though - I'm inclined to wonder how often/offensive vandals need to be before semi protection is granted. Just my opinion Stormcloud (talk) 11:50, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, users inflating certifications despite warnings to cease, also adding inflated chart positions. Mister sparky (talk) 18:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. tedder (talk) 19:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Mann act has been semi-protected four times for this vandalism (the repeated addition of Michael Jackson to the list of prosecuted individuals with a fake reference). Each time the vandal, who has a large pool of IPs, just waits out the protection and starts again. MrOllie (talk) 17:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. by Beeblebrox (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). tedder (talk) 19:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Full protection Continued edit warring and assumption of Muntz's death (although I know it is true, one other user continues to deny, so as a favor to him, protection of the article is the only answer). WikiLubber (talk) 14:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Only semiprotecting; logged-in users should be able to follow the policies. tedder (talk) 19:11, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection over the last few hours there have been several edit wars caused by anonymous IPs adding POV comments. --Philip Stevens (talk) 17:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, High traffic article and linked to from the main page. I would rather we keep it unprotected for as long as possible NW (Talk) 17:53, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    User talk:86.178.134.37 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection user talk of blocked user, Inappropriate unblock request Diff. Momo san Gespräch 16:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined While lame, it is not exactly abuse. — Kralizec! (talk) 17:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection, spamming by Wallflowers98 socks adding 4shared links but getting around the spam filter by putting the links in nowiki tags. Momo san Gespräch 15:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 36 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Kralizec! (talk) 16:06, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection Unsourced addition/revision of cast of English voices by a vandal using multiple IDs (96.239.238.246 and 71.172.211.224; the guy previously used 96.239.234.216 and 96.239.231.189) still continues after expiration of last block. Again, the sources for the confirmed list are ANN and this gallery of screenshots showing the credits for the English version. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 15:31, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of ten days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Kralizec! (talk) 16:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Looks like a concerted vandalism attack by multiple IPs going on. Oscroft (talk) 15:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Judging from that, looks like 4chan to me. Momo san Gespräch 15:18, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection, see history lots of IP vandalism, last good version is here. Thank you! --HappyInGeneral (talk) 15:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Merge duplicate request with this one Momo san Gespräch 15:56, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Kralizec! (talk) 16:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:71.239.23.70 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection user talk of blocked user, ranting on talk page after being blocked. Also violations of WP:CIVIL and refactoring other users comments. Momo san Gespräch 15:09, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. — Kralizec! (talk) 16:00, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite create-protection, Repeatedly re-created vanity page for non-notable person. MuffledThud (talk) 14:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected — Kralizec! (talk) 15:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection high-risk template. Most country templates are fully protected due to wide-spread use, but a few aren't, including this one that I just reverted vandalism on. Perhaps protection policy should be consistent? (Edits to these templates should be very very rarely required.) Other country templates that lack the protection that most have are: Template:ARU, Template:BAH, Template:MAF, Template:NZ, Template:NZL, Template:UAE. Tcnuk (talk) 12:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    All Done Rjd0060 (talk) 14:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Currently subject of a discussion on bbc website http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/8432885.stm. Basement12 (T.C) 12:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of seven days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. NW (Talk) 15:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Constant IP vandalism by block evading user Aradic-es. ◅ P R O D U C E R (TALK) 12:23, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined The article has only been edited by two IPs in the past 25 days. — Kralizec! (talk) 15:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=334913855"