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
→‎{{la|Raspberry Pi}}: declined for the bot
Line 43: Line 43:
:I'm not going to fully protect the page because of one user. Give your evidence to the user on either their talk page or the article talk page, and if they insert false info deliberately we can look in to blocking. [[User:Prodego|<font color="darkgreen">''Prodego''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Prodego|<font color="darkgreen">talk</font>]]</sup> 01:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
:I'm not going to fully protect the page because of one user. Give your evidence to the user on either their talk page or the article talk page, and if they insert false info deliberately we can look in to blocking. [[User:Prodego|<font color="darkgreen">''Prodego''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Prodego|<font color="darkgreen">talk</font>]]</sup> 01:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
::{{RFPP|d}} (procedural) [[User:Lectonar|Lectonar]] ([[User talk:Lectonar|talk]]) 08:13, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
::{{RFPP|d}} (procedural) [[User:Lectonar|Lectonar]] ([[User talk:Lectonar|talk]]) 08:13, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm just putting it here, and this is the last time i'll post in the same place as Jo i promis, but my name is Ron Petterson, not Christian Woods. Appartment blocks often share the same IP address at least where i live it does. and either way, whether i'm Christian or not is none of this guy's damn business. i came here to add good information and have no intent on adding false information to this site, so no need for block. [[user:Alien arceus|Alien]] [[user talk:Alien arceus|Arceus]] 10:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)


===={{la|Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute}}====
===={{la|Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute}}====

Revision as of 10:22, 1 February 2013

"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 vandalism – Vandalism that targets the religion of the school and generally insults the Catholic faith. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:49, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Also, just a reminder to leave a vandalism warning note on the IP's talk page. It makes it easier to assess the likelihood that they will keep vandalizing the page. Best, Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term dynamic IP vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 03:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. --Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite Semi-Protection: It already redirects to the proper target, so there is no need for further editing (the main article even has a hatnote to the disambiguation page), and has a ridiculously long history of vandalism for a redirect (>30 edits of mostly IP vandalism or reverting it). It looks to me like vandals target this page since the one it redirects to is protected. I'm worried what they'll vandalize next if THIS is protected... --Free Wales Now! what did I screw up?  02:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Also, last vandalism was past December. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:20, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and edit warring. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, no edits for five days GedUK  10:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High levels of IP users vandalizing it's biographies of living persons policy including IPs removing it's reliable source to a fake date of birth. Steam5 (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined You mean this article? We had 2 IP edits in 2013, and 8 in 2012, overall. This is not in any way a "high" level of vandalism. Please read our protection policy. Lectonar (talk) 08:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Bad edits from two IPs, BLP article. The Interior (Talk) 00:39, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Protected by Materialscientist. The Interior (Talk) 00:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 06:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Many BLP issues, please protect for 1 week. JMHamo (talk) 23:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. Lectonar (talk) 08:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Pending changes: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 23:34, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined The overall level of vandalism is not high, and not all IP edits are vandalism. Lectonar (talk) 08:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary protection: Persistent vandalism - User Alien arceus was once a user who was well known for adding fraudulent information on Bulbapedia, where I am high-ranking staff. It seems since his ban there he has followed me here, and has started adding false information to Rick Moranis's page as if out of spite for me. I can provide evidence to back up my claims if requested. Jo The Marten (talk) 22:23, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm not going to fully protect the page because of one user. Give your evidence to the user on either their talk page or the article talk page, and if they insert false info deliberately we can look in to blocking. Prodego talk 01:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined (procedural) Lectonar (talk) 08:13, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm just putting it here, and this is the last time i'll post in the same place as Jo i promis, but my name is Ron Petterson, not Christian Woods. Appartment blocks often share the same IP address at least where i live it does. and either way, whether i'm Christian or not is none of this guy's damn business. i came here to add good information and have no intent on adding false information to this site, so no need for block. Alien Arceus 10:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection. We have a 3 day old edit war by experienced editors - lets lock up the page and force them to just talk over talking and edit-waring - (related to Self-determination dispute - Protected Self-determination: Edit warring / Content dispute that will most likely have to be extended).Moxy (talk) 20:21, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Looks like things have calmed down. If any issue continues, please feel free to leave a note on my talk. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:24, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection this page has a long history of disruptive editing by IP and new users for a moderately high visible page. Additionally there is a COI issue with a named user that is being addressed separately over at COIN. Thanks Tiggerjay (talk) 21:51, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    When considering this request, please note that this article also has several years history of prompt reverts of vandalism and problematic edits, and many constructive edits with detailed edit summaries, by an IP editor. 188.29.82.106 (talk) 22:53, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I would agree that there has been some positive contributions from IP editors; however far more IP edits reverted than constructive. Tiggerjay (talk) 02:40, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined Looking at the article history, the level of vandalism is under the threshold for semiprotection, and the noticeable amount of positive IP contributions makes me refrain from using pending changes protection too. Some years ago, we would have said: just wachtlist and revert; so, I have added it to my watchlist. Lectonar (talk) 07:56, 1 February 2013 (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.

    • Rules of chess has been semi-protected for nearly 19 months. The admin that protected it retired April 2012. I think it should be unprotected now. I have it on my watch list and I usually check my watch list several times per day, so I can watch out for it. If the vandalism returns, I will ask for it to be protected again, but I think it is time to try it unprotected. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 00:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Unprotected GedUK  10:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection: Article was semi-protected for 2 months, which seems uncharacteristically long for page with no appreciable history of vandalism and a single IP editwar that lasted only a few edits. The article itself indicates it is outdated, so on the balance, I would consider it to be better to unprotect this to open it up for more constructive IP edits than lock it down because of a minor altercation that happened 5 weeks ago. 76.121.244.252 (talk) 06:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    You should contact the original admin who protected the article first. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 07:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined For the bot. You should ask EdJohnston (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) GedUK  10:21, 1 February 2013 (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

    Please see Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Rolling archive for a rolling archive of the last 7 days of protection requests.

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=536004005"