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
Chow (talk | contribs)
318 edits
m Don't touch this Twinkle coding please.
Line 7: Line 7:


== Current requests for protection ==
== Current requests for protection ==
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}


===={{la|Kre-O}}====
===={{la|Kre-O}}====

Revision as of 05:27, 23 July 2012

"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 semi-protection. Persistent level of IP vandalism. -- Wikipedical (talk) 04:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection. Seem to be several editors who represent the actual subject of the article on the cusp of an edit war over some of the particulars of the content. Would recommend just a couple of days of protection for the page to stop the incentive to edit war. -- Avanu (talk) 03:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Regular POV additions (legendary figure, etc.). Qwyrxian (talk) 03:43, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Adding useless information. Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 03:24, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]


    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.

    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

    Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – User:Sweetpeaearloscar is purporting to be a representative of Jason Williams and is intent on wrecking havoc with the content of the page. The user continually is changing referenced material and this has devolved into an edit war between this user and User:Mean as custard. Thus, full page protection is likely warranted to stop this. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 19:40, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined The user has not edited the page since they were given a final warning. If they continue, I'm happy to block or protect (whichever is most appropriate). ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:18, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Some of Sweetpeaearloscar's edits were justifiable. I can't defend everything he/she did, but the article did contain some incorrect and/or poorly sourced information. I'll keep an eye on things. Zagalejo^^^ 05:24, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. E4024 (talk) 18:55, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for 1 day. This is not vandalism, but a content dispute. Use this time to discuss the article. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Sjones23 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Harassment by IP sockpuppet of the banned user Fragments of Jade (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. The IP and the new account need blocks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:25, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    (Non-administrator comment) why is this here there no sign of vandalism so i cant see the need for proctection--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 16:45, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined. I've removed the notice of his death from his user page. Per WP:DWG, we must be "absolutely sure" the user has died. The link above is to Facebook, not a reliable source. If sufficient confirmation is obtained, the notice can be added, in which case the user page should be full protected, also per DWG.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:51, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: - IP-vandalism, edit disputes, etc.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.. Although it takes forever to review diffs in an article of this size, I don't see a lot of recent disruptive activity by non-auto-confirmed editors.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:40, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Give semi-protection to this page.The actor had died recently,so people(IP) adding ungraceful things and often vandalize by editing their appreciation in lead section in italics word style. PS-visit article's history. Thank You . 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 08:20, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) Article has been protected a number of times including a recently expired semi-protection. Suggest semi-protection for a couple of weeks to let everything calm down. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 08:34, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. There hasn't been a lot of disruptive activity since expiration of the last semi-protection (which was 3 days). Four days should be sufficient.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:26, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite full protection: This page has been protected several times with each stint increasing in length. From what I can see of the history, this page has suffered from chronic disruptive editing since the action which led to this revert[1]. The past month has seen no addition of useful information; new users have either attempted the usual rebranding of the birthplace without consensus or it has been blatant vandalism such as the example most recent to this post, reverted here. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 20:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

     Comment: There seems to be a lot of IP editors, so semi maybe best. If there are issues with users, blocks are best.--Chip123456 TalkContribs 21:51, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This should be enough time let thing cool down. While I suppose there always will be a some degree of edit warring over ethnicity, it may be less disruptive then. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 06:24, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Brief comment. I appreciate the move, this way atleast I can edit even though my proposal would have excluded me too. So you know there will be no ethnicity argument because his ethnicity is not disputed. In fact, it is sourced; but with a name like his, nobody with knowledge attempts to render him otherwise. The trouble we had on the article stretched from content dispute to blatant disruption, the article was a hot spot, it attracted disruptive edits. Even the rebranding of the birthplace, you'll see that editors who try it on with this page never venture out onto others, yet all standard Kosovar subjects born before 2008 will be born on a historical territory unfavourable to those editors! Established editors know the score there, so these IPs are merely being clowns. Thanks for the measure. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 17:43, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Newco Rangers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Can this be given a extension for about another 2-4 weeks the dispute is still on going the request for comment is about ready to go live, can Newco Rangers also be extended to. Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 11:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Question: I'm not really up to speed on the Rangers issue; can you show me where the RfC is, please? ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 13:55, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    sorry it is here i will be putting it live next week just awaiting some additional sources for both sides of the argument and to get a final copyedit done by User:Drmargi once i have finished writing it up--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 15:32, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined Let's wait until the current protection expires. If edit warring continues, then the page can be protected again; let's not pre-emptively lengthen the protection. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:16, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: We don't know the actual size of the star, But several sites have listed the star as having a radius of 1800 ~ 2100. Which would make it biggest star. Astronomers have also commented that this is the biggest star found. Rackshea (talk) 09:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) I don't see an edit history which would warrant page protection (see my comment above). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 10:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Per above. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:11, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: We don't know the actual size of the star, But several sites have listed the star as having a radius of 1800 ~ 2100. Which would make it biggest star. Astronomers have also commented that this is the biggest star found.

    http://www.universetoday.com/39472/vy-canis-majoris/ http://www.deepastronomy.com/hypernova-vy-canis-majoris.html http://herschel.cf.ac.uk/results/spectrum-massive-star-vy-canis-majoris. Rackshea (talk) 09:59, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) I don't see any reason for page protection. You need to have a read through the protection policy. If you think there is a problem with the article try discussing it on the article's talk page. Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 10:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. I see you've begun to discuss this on the talk page; that's a great start and I'd encourage you to continue with that path. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent Colorado shooting has led some to vandalize the page. Protect for a few days?. Athene cunicularia (talk) 23:59, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked - Semi-protection is not needed, since it is only from one IP. The IP address 75.145.127.182 Contributions is now blocked for 48 hours. ObtundTalk 00:06, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: - Page needs semi-protection since the vandalism isn't only done by one IP. Vandalism has been done by the user MikeTheRocker-Punker Contributions. I gave MikeTheRocker-Punker an "only warning," but the page still needs to be semi-protected for one week. ObtundTalk 12:56, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for 2 weeks. Hopefully it should blow over by then. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:07, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-vandalism, adding spam links. Torreslfchero (talk) 16:39, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 2 weeks. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:05, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full-protection: Persistent vandalism of a BLP --aad_Dira (talk) 17:22, 22 July 2012 (UTC).[reply]

    Note: This article has been semi protected until Jan 2013 by User:Alison, who is monitoring the page for BLP and socking issues. I suggest the closer of this issue consult with Alison before overriding her protection. Fasttimes68 (talk) 17:30, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Since Alison's semi-protection, there's been no disruption to the article. I'm happy for Alison to override my decision (or do whatever she feels is best) without my consent, though. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:02, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – No idea what's going on here, this thing is getting too many edits to deal with. -— Isarra ༆ 18:02, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment I reverted the article to an early June revision that appears to be stable and vandalism free. Safiel (talk) 18:17, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Already protected. for 2 days by User:Fluffernutter ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:57, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary Semi-protection: Repeated spamming by IP. Anbu121 (talk me) 18:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 24 hours. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:55, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Unsourced defamatory material has continually been inserted into the article and the AfD template has been removed. Hirolovesswords (talk) 18:35, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 5 days (until the AfD finishes). ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Repeated spamming by IP. Anbu121 (talk me) 18:37, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 24 hours. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Spamming by IP. Torreslfchero (talk) 18:38, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 24 hours. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:49, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – There are currently discussion with uninvolved editor people came as WP:NINJA and revert. Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 18:44, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Bad faithed request to protect the "Right Version". So yeah, by all means protect it, just make sure it's not to Shrike's version (would serve him/her right). More seriously, it's a content dispute, the reverting is not even that serious.VolunteerMarek 18:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    It was bad faith if you was already made 3 reverts anyhow you don't participate in talk and only come to revert--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 18:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    You know very well that this article is very closely related to another article we're arguing about.VolunteerMarek 18:54, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    So what you could revert the article anytime you want?You failing of WP:AGF is problematic--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 18:58, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Fully protected for 4 days. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:39, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandalism from IP-hopper from Peru. El0i (talk) 20:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 2 months. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Arbitrary changes and deletion of previously created content by non-verified users CharlesMcKim (talk) 14:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Question: What's so problematic about those edits? Please be bold and improve / undo them yourself, then seek help if another editor insists on adding content which you think is unsuitable. Deryck C. 14:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:59, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 2 days. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:56, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – The Vatican decree that withdrew the titles of "Pontificia" and "Catolica" to the university is not yet in effect. It lacks an official statement by the Peruvian authorities before any name change. Andreasm just talk to me 21:23, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Could you discuss that on the talk page first? ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:58, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. I ask for full/semi move protection (not edit), since there is a pending intent to change the name and my subsequent reversion. Andreasm just talk to me 22:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Move protected for 2 days. Ok, that sounds reasonable. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 22:20, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent spate of vandalism due to Cockburn's death; temp. protection should work. RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 22:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 1 week. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 22:22, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition by IP editor of low value & POV content. Semi-protection will stop this and he will most likely move on to something else like sorting his Pokemon cards. Biker Biker (talk) 22:25, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined The user has not edited the page since they received a final warning at their talk page. Wait until they edit again before requesting protection. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 22:37, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Create protection: Repeatedly recreated – This article was recreated five times in the last two years. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:06, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected for 6 months. If he plays a professional game in that time (which would resolve the issues at the AfD), let an admin know. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 23:10, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection persistent POV-pushing of the White Tower as a Byzantine monument by IPs and new accounts, all socks of the same guy, when it is referenced as being an Ottoman structure. Spill-over from a similar one-man (and his sockpuppets) edit-war at the Greek Wikipedia. Constantine ✍ 23:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 23:39, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: IP keeps reintroducing entry to the list against consensus. See talk page. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 23:37, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 23:44, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=503715975"