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
Hersfold (talk | contribs)
33,142 edits
Line 13: Line 13:


:*'''Comment.''' It was not a mistake. The editor in question reverted the article to an old revision from [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Itinerant&oldid=382668700 13:37, 3 September 2010], while he has [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Itinerant&diff=prev&oldid=399589580 admitted] doing this in an attempt to force merger with another article, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HelloAnnyong&diff=prev&oldid=399609331 called me a troll] for warning him, and then repeated his last action [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Itinerant&diff=prev&oldid=399615354 again]. User also disregarded and removed (reverted) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RashersTierney&diff=prev&oldid=399615818 all warnings]. [[User:General Hindsight|General Hindsight]] ([[User talk:General Hindsight|talk]]) 01:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
:*'''Comment.''' It was not a mistake. The editor in question reverted the article to an old revision from [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Itinerant&oldid=382668700 13:37, 3 September 2010], while he has [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Itinerant&diff=prev&oldid=399589580 admitted] doing this in an attempt to force merger with another article, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HelloAnnyong&diff=prev&oldid=399609331 called me a troll] for warning him, and then repeated his last action [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Itinerant&diff=prev&oldid=399615354 again]. User also disregarded and removed (reverted) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RashersTierney&diff=prev&oldid=399615818 all warnings]. [[User:General Hindsight|General Hindsight]] ([[User talk:General Hindsight|talk]]) 01:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
:*'''Comment'''There was no mistake in reverting prolonged edits by consecutively blocked proxies. The 'warnings' were most certainly disregarded. [[User:RashersTierney|RashersTierney]] ([[User talk:RashersTierney|talk]]) 01:13, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


==== {{la|Darioush Bayandor}} ====
==== {{la|Darioush Bayandor}} ====

Revision as of 01:13, 30 November 2010

"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.

    Temporary full-protect. After recent anonymous-IP disruption on 22 November, long-term users continue to vandalize the article (today). I have reverted the edit and issued a warning, but the article in question would probably benefit from full (sysop only) protection for awhile. General Hindsight (talk) 23:55, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, looks more like a mistake than malice. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection, for edit warring by multiple editors. Full protection would stimulate discussion on the talk page and aid in resolution. Binksternet (talk) 00:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection due to frequent vandalism. -- Brangifer (talk) 00:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protect Until after Christmas. Daily IP vandalism regarding Donder being changed to Donner. I'm getting tired of reverting. Asher196 (talk) 00:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, After being unprotected by Phil Sandifer (talk · contribs) iPad has as before attracted significant vandalism. My attempts to contact the unprotecting admin have given no response.

    There have been a few good IP edits so possibly Pending Changes could work, though at least 80% of IP edits are vandalism. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 00:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect frequent vandalism, Page is highly visible and unfortunately receives a high level of IP vandalism. Bushy moustache (talk) 00:31, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, heavy vandalism from new users/ips. Usb10 Connected? 00:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:09, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection dispute, A longstanding dispute over the artist's birthname and birthdate appears to be erupting once again. Might i suggest protection until a clear and final solution to the problem is sought and implemented. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 00:11, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, heavy ip vandalism. Usb10 Connected? 00:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. by Materialscientist. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:14, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect. Repeated and constant high level of IP vandalism. Aman329 (talk) 23:24, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Frequent vandalism since early Saturday when he missed the potential game-winning kicks in a high-profile American football game. BwburkeLetsPlays (talk|contribs) 23:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:00, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    PC Vandalism has started up again since semi expired. Level 2 Pc might be better in this situation. Inka888 22:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. to the actual article. (You requested protection for a redirect.) Courcelles 22:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect - 2 weeks. Ongoing, revert-warring IP vandalism again. 3rd incident. Prior protection was for 1 week. Lexein (talk) 22:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 22:56, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Sarah Palin (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection, BLP vandalism. NW (Talk) 21:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 21:45, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite full protection vandalism, Repeated and constant vandalism from anonymous IPs (probably one user). Mokele (talk) 19:18, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. AlexiusHoratius 19:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection, High profile page at the moment with many unconstructive edits and vandalism. There also appears to be an amount of edit warring going on. Fraggle81 (talk) 18:49, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:59, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection, recent negative commentary added by socks. WuhWuzDat 18:34, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:46, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection Excessive vandalism. TbhotchTalk C. 18:15, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection, temporary. There have been over 10 vandalism reverts in the past 2 days, including 4 from ClueBot NG in the past 17 hours. Thanks, --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection, new users soapboxing, posting negative information. WuhWuzDat 18:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection dispute, IP Editor is having a Dispute. MichealH Have I done something wrong? 17:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment That one IP editor should be blocked, no need to protect the page. --Pontificalibus (talk) 17:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    User(s) blocked. IP blocked by Favonian. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:08, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism since page was last unprotected on 25 November. --Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:49, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:07, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Roughly 50% of all IP edits (an actual figure I calculated in March based on several years worth of edits) are vandalism or editing tests. I previously managed to get the page semi-protected for one-month. Shortly after the ban expired, IP vandalism continued at about the same 50% rate. This page should have permanent semi-protection: It has a long history of continual IP vandalism. On balance, I believe the article's development would benefit more from protection than any harm protection would do. Jason Quinn (talk) 16:34, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, while you;re percentage is probably not far off based on a look at the history, the vandalism is too sporadic to warrant protection. The alst 100 edits go back over six months and, though there has been a slight spike in the last day or two, things have been very quiet for the last month. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:46, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand your view but I disagree that it's best for the article. I feel like removing myself from the page's watchlist is a good idea. I'm just tired of seeing it there almost every day because of vandalism/reverting. At some point, that just noise. Jason Quinn (talk) 19:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    It's nowhere near every day. Even assuming that every other edit is vandalism, the last 100 edits go back 6 months, so that's an average of less than twice a week, which is not frequent enough for protection imo. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:19, 29 November 2010 (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.

    Requesting an admin see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#Bradden Inman and desalt Bradden Inman. GNG met and another editor has signed off on it.Cptnono (talk) 01:52, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:16, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks!Cptnono (talk) 03:17, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Requesting unprotection or setting a definite time for expiry of protection. Only entry in protection log was indefinite semiprotection in January. Very few edits to article since that time. I suggest that indefinite semiprotection was perhaps excessive as a first measure. --Bsherr (talk) 19:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Protecting admin doesn't seem to be active and has resigned his admin bit, so let's see how things go. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:13, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Can someone please remove the protection from We R Who We R? I requested semi protection here and it was full protected instead for edit warring which i was not, thats besides the point. I tried contacting the admin User_talk:Beeblebrox#Mistake but he had to leave. Anyways check the page history, there is no edit warring just me reverting constant unsourced edits, vandalism, test edits ect.... It was in no way shape or form edit warring, they were additions but different editors. Can you please remove the full protect and switch to semi? Thanks so much - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 04:10, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    posted here on behalf of the above user, as they asked in a helpme  Chzz  ►  04:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC) [reply]
    Not unprotected you;d have to discuss that with Beeblebrox. I don't see a case for semi regardless, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:27, 27 November 2010 (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

    Temporary semi-protection. Boring reference added by IPs. http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Business/April-11-1954-The-most-boring-day-in-the-20th-century.htm — Arthur Rubin (talk) 16:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection. Boring reference added by IPs. http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Business/April-11-1954-The-most-boring-day-in-the-20th-century.htm — Arthur Rubin (talk) 16:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:40, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Excessive Vandalism in the recent days from non-registered IPs.
    Anish Viswa 15:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Disambig page is a frequent target of Anon IP vandalism, mostly wannabe gang members adding their "thug" names to it, but other generic vandalism as well. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 14:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, We've had too many IPs/un-autoconfirmed users trying to continue a previous edit war over whether this is a compilation or studio album. If not indefinate then extended protection would be good... -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 13:52, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:07, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite cascading semi-protection vandalism, Thier seams to be alot of vandalism on this page. TucsonDavid (talk) 13:48, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Repeated addition of unsourced information about the song's track listings etc. . -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 12:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:08, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection WP:BLP vandalism. Slow motion vandalism from a dynamic range who are adding insults about a friend of the same name to the article, reverting from a different IP each time the vandalism is removed. 80.176.233.6 (talk) 11:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I've gone longer on this than normal, as a month will take us into the christmas holidays, and the boys might be too distracted by their shiny new toys to vandalise here. Fingers crossed. GedUK  11:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=399624794"