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
Semi-auto-clerking: [PR: 0 | UR: 0 | RfSE: 0 | FR: 5] (5 reports pending)
Rockgenre (talk | contribs)
4,212 edits
→‎Current requests for protection: Requesting semi protection on the Battle of the Little Bighorn.
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|Battle of the Little Bighorn}}====
'''Semi-protect'''. Consistent silly vandalism and blanking. See: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_the_Little_Bighorn&diff=464982784&oldid=464980973], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_the_Little_Bighorn&diff=464980751&oldid=464802401], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_the_Little_Bighorn&diff=464661141&oldid=464469131], etc. [[User:Rockgenre|RG]] ([[User talk:Rockgenre|talk]]) 03:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
==== {{la|Becky McDonald}} ====
==== {{la|Becky McDonald}} ====
'''Indefinite semi-protection.''' [[User:Rjeng2000|Rjeng2000]] ([[User talk:Rjeng2000|talk]]) 02:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
'''Indefinite semi-protection.''' [[User:Rjeng2000|Rjeng2000]] ([[User talk:Rjeng2000|talk]]) 02:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:47, 10 December 2011

"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.

    Semi-protect. Consistent silly vandalism and blanking. See: [1], [2], [3], etc. RG (talk) 03:47, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection. Rjeng2000 (talk) 02:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect. Repeated vandalism, presumably made by the same vandal using different IPs. Jetstreamer (talk) 02:44, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. →Στc. 00:33, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection Besides some blatant vandalism, many editors are prematurely reporting a deal with the Knicks that has not been announced by the team itself. Zagalejo^^^ 23:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Copyvio, every time. andy (talk) 23:28, 9 December 2011 (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.

    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: Persistent vandalism – Plenty of recent vandalism. 1966batfan (talk) 21:39, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Malinaccier (talk) 21:56, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Onslaught of vandalism by IPs and non-autoconfirmed registered editors. Bbb23 (talk) 21:30, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Malinaccier (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and blp violations. Good faith editors are having a difficult time cleaning up with all the problems. --Ronz (talk) 21:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Binksternet (talk) 20:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Signed to Bad Boy and trolls are now saying his career is over, etc. Needs a couple of days lock. KING GRIM LOL YO WHATS UP (talk) 19:18, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple IP crystall ballism on not finalized transaction. TM 18:50, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Lots of people adding James Hetfield as a table due to popular article. Falcon8765 (TALK) 18:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editors entering incorrect information. Mosmof (talk) 18:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Infinite semi-protection – Needless to say, Conservatism isn't all that liked by some people. As such, this template, which is transcluded within around sixty pages, is a frequent target of vandalism: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. Every time this template is defaced, the defacement is transcluded on around sixty pages. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 18:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Editing of photo captions to include phrases such as "crazy eyes.". GEOFFREY 18:24, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 19:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Excessive revert-warring by a series of newly-created accounts; also WP:BLP & WP:OUTING issues (c.f. [9]). Middayexpress (talk) 17:46, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked.. I found a nice sockfarm, and took it out. See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Radicalafrica. J.delanoygabsadds 21:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by anonymous users. —Commander (Ping me) 17:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:20, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Repeated wikifiddling by IP or newly registered editors making unsourced changes, particularly to the list of flights operated out of the airport. This has long been a target for planespotters and anoraks who seem to be allergic to references. Semi-protection, at least for a while (but ideally long term) would stop these pests. . Bob Re-born (talk) 15:37, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Arnavchaudhary (talk) 15:20, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. by HJ Mitchell (talk · contribs). J.delanoygabsadds 20:48, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP user on a dynamic IP is edit warring to add sources that don't meet WP:RS and unsourced OR. Editor has crossed 3RR, but given that the history shows the same editor on slightly different addresses, page protection will likely be more effective. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:59, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. -FASTILY (TALK) 21:17, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Full unprotection: Article was full-protected even though the entire editwar was between two individual editors. Both of them blatantly violated WP:3RR and should simply have been individually blocked (or warned; I'm not a big fan of using 3RR policy as a bludgeon unless the editors in question are recalcitrant). That little one-on-one squabble, an editors issue not an article issue, is not sufficient justification for preventing everyone else from editing the article, especially not for almost the entire month. No evidence of a pattern of IP vandalism, so no need for semi-protection, either. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 02:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Inquire here -FASTILY (TALK) 08:39, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I saw reverts by three users: User:Biker Biker, User:Ebikeguy, and User:Alofok. I will unprotect the article (seeing as there has been no discussion anyway. Hopefully these three won't jump back into it...but if they do, let me know. Malinaccier (talk) 13:06, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I made one entirely appropriate edit to this article. Your accusation that I engaged in edit warring, and your threat to block me, were both completely inappropriate. Please refrain from such actions in the future. Ebikeguy (talk) 15:51, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Johannes003 (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Seems like a large number of constructive edits here. Malinaccier (talk) 16:27, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You must be joking!! Could you please check again how many IP users have been continously changing the box office figures and removing references etc. I don't see a single constructive edit there...other than mine! Johannes003 (talk) 16:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    There are several reference adding edits, and very little actual vandalism. Box office statistics do change over time, and when the original figures are not mentioned in the sources provided, how can one determine which version is correct? Malinaccier (talk) 16:46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    And with a certain degree of constructive edits, I am reluctant to protect. Maybe another admin could take a look at this? There is a large volume of anonymous edits, but very few are explicit vandalism. Malinaccier (talk) 16:47, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: I agree with Malinaccier's analysis. It is unclear which stats are correct and the number of constructive IP edits suggests that semi-protection would be counterproductive. WJBscribe (talk) 17:34, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    It is a list of the highest-grossing opening weekends for films, these stats cannot change over the time! And the figures are all properly sourced! You see, there is actually no reason to edit the list, still you can see that there have been numerous edits during the entire last week, ever since the last protection expired. If you are still not convinced, then I don't know either. We will have to undo all the edits manually. Johannes003 (talk) 18:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Where are the stats sourced? I see various sources being cited row by row, but some rows don't have citations, and Malinaccier seems to suggest that in some cases the figures are not actually in the sources being cited. IF the stats are sourced, then clearly Johannes003 is right, as they cannot be stats that change over time, and the anons fiddling with the stats are in fact engaging in either vandalism or a continual pattern of perhaps non-maliciously adding unsourced information that contradicts sourced information, which is still a policy violation. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 03:33, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I checked some of the citations and they did not have data for box office figures. Malinaccier (talk) 03:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm. This suggests that the real solution is deletion of that column, per WP:V. Nothing to fight over. Seriously; I'm not being WP:POINTy. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 05:26, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I feel like we are talking at cross purposes. I don't know which sources you checked, I'm even wondering if we are talking about the same article. Anyway, the list has been removed now. Johannes003 (talk) 17:14, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=465065963"