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
Line 102: Line 102:
::{{U|EdJohnston}} thank you for your closure of the AN3 report. I'm fine with the outcome and, as you say, removing protection will likely not result in anything constructive. I said on the article's talk page that if {{U|ChrisP2K5}} decides to continue the edit war after protection is removed, I will not revert and simply file an ANI or similar report. [[User:EvergreenFir|'''<span style="color:#8b00ff;">Eve</span><span style="color:#6528c2;">rgr</span><span style="color:#3f5184;">een</span><span style="color:#197947;">Fir</span>''']] [[User talk:EvergreenFir|(talk)]] <small>Please {{[[Template:re|re]]}}</small> 04:24, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
::{{U|EdJohnston}} thank you for your closure of the AN3 report. I'm fine with the outcome and, as you say, removing protection will likely not result in anything constructive. I said on the article's talk page that if {{U|ChrisP2K5}} decides to continue the edit war after protection is removed, I will not revert and simply file an ANI or similar report. [[User:EvergreenFir|'''<span style="color:#8b00ff;">Eve</span><span style="color:#6528c2;">rgr</span><span style="color:#3f5184;">een</span><span style="color:#197947;">Fir</span>''']] [[User talk:EvergreenFir|(talk)]] <small>Please {{[[Template:re|re]]}}</small> 04:24, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
:::EdJohnston, please review your decision and consider the entirety of the argument. EvergreenFir keeps adding incorrect information to the page, I keep restoring the correct info. He claims to have proof but it's mostly OR, and the citation I made is from an interview that directly refutes his claim. It's not an edit war, it's a user engaging in disruptive editing. --[[User:ChrisP2K5|ChrisP2K5]] ([[User talk:ChrisP2K5|talk]]) 05:53, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
:::EdJohnston, please review your decision and consider the entirety of the argument. EvergreenFir keeps adding incorrect information to the page, I keep restoring the correct info. He claims to have proof but it's mostly OR, and the citation I made is from an interview that directly refutes his claim. It's not an edit war, it's a user engaging in disruptive editing. --[[User:ChrisP2K5|ChrisP2K5]] ([[User talk:ChrisP2K5|talk]]) 05:53, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
:::: {{rfpp|d}}. Please follow the dispute resolution avenues.--[[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 13:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


== Current requests for edits to a protected page ==
== Current requests for edits to a protected page ==

Revision as of 13:30, 2 July 2014

"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 increase in protection level

    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 protection: Content dispute/edit warring – JackSebastian and Darkfrog have turned this page into their personal battleground. Open ANI case seems to be going nowhere. DonIago (talk) 12:47, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. by me for a full week. Nyttend (talk) 13:11, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Numerous IPs with either vandalism or unsourced edits. LRD NO (talk) 11:43, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Edit warring by IP addresses against consensus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:190.44.133.67_reported_by_User:MelbourneStar_.28Result:_.29. Alans1977 (talk) 11:38, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP hopper keeps changing section; three different IPs used already. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 11:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Grawp/Jarlaxle Artemis attack, see history. Stemoc (talk) 10:37, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Rangeblocked. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:54, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – And the Talk page too, to which an IP user just posted the contents that had been deleted from the main article. —Largo Plazo (talk) 10:28, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Article page Done by Bbb23 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) a few hours before this request but talk page has only been created once and remains unprotected. tutterMouse (talk) 11:35, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism on this account. Changes on filmography table by different users for different opinions. Unexplained removal of source content says spam ref while they are clearly not. Daan0001 (talk) 09:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined You've been edit-warring against several people. If you continue, we'll need to use Special:Block/Daan0001. Nyttend (talk) 12:57, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requesting protection for short period of time after recent football game; Tim Howard manning the US's Department of Defense has been a recurring vandal theme in the last few hours that's gone viral on social media and is attracting attention. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 07:38, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

     Request withdrawn, Closedmouth took care of it as I posted this. Thanks Cloud. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 07:40, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Withdrawn by requestor Ϫ 08:12, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Recent transfer speculation on this footballer. Player has not moved nor agreed terms with another club but various IPs have added in unsourced edits implying the player has been transferred. LRD NO (talk) 06:53, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:14, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Kleargear (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent use of page as personal attack platform by various IPs (most likely socks). Related to this ANI notice against suspected sock at Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Severe_Uncivil_behavior_by_User:Stoxxman. Zhanzhao (talk) 02:43, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. -- Ϫ 07:54, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The page has been page protected many times. The last six edits since the page protection ended have been reverted, mostly they were vandalism. There really is nothing to add to the page most of the time. Hoops gza (talk) 02:37, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Increasing and persistent addition of unconsensous information. OscarFercho (talk) 02:16, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of unsourced episodes and airdates. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated disruptive editing by IP users. EdwardH (talk) 19:23, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection:, Persistant daily IP vandalism regarding the subject's birth date.--Asher196 (talk) 16:13, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked.. 125.26.0.0/18 range-blocked for a month. Favonian (talk) 10:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Edit warring. (t) Josve05a (c) 05:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: There are many IP users vandalizing this article and arguing with each other and none are using reliable sources. I think a semi-protection on this page would be best.  — TheMadonnaMusicCN (talk, contribs) 22:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations. Gh87 in the public computer (talk) 20:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Currently there are two single purpose IPs who are engaging in low level edit warring and who are reluctant to engage the other editor on the talk page. I assume that the two IPs are the same person, but I could be wrong. In one recent instance there was some discussion and one IP did participate to a limited degree. Hoever, after two uninvolved editors gave a third opinion but the consensus that emerged was ignored by the IP. I think a temporary semi-protection will force the IP(s) to engage at the talk page more thoroughly and/or create an account and thereby become more accountable for their editing. This will help to move forward discussion, collaboration and give the IP's time to get educated on WP guidelines and procedures. — Keithbob • Talk • 17:26, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    • Comment: a third opinion is not a consensus, but in any case, the history linked to does not show the IP ignoring the third opinion -- the IP has edited the article but has left the agreed-upon text in place. I intend to offer some help to take the article forward, but am busy in RL and may not be able to do much before the weekend. I am not convinced that the IP is the only one pushing a POV here. Please would the admin dealing with this take note of these things when deciding whether to semi-protect. --Stfg (talk) 10:37, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Please look at the pattern of editing on the page and talk page since the very specific point of the NRC request. When points of contention have arisen, I have consistently tried to bring this to the talk page and had these please for discussion ignored. I think the semi-protection will go a long way in helping the IPs to engage on the talk page rather than just reverting edits and ignoring substantive points of discussion. Thanks for your time and consideration. --Pengortm (talk) 12:52, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Please be aware of WP:SEMI where it states (under Guidance for administrators) that semi-protection should not be used to "to privilege registered users over unregistered users in (valid) content disputes". This is a valid content dispute. The basis of this request is the claim that the IP is editing against consensus. I don't believe s/he has done so. If s/he does so in future, we can then request semi-protection. --Stfg (talk) 09:38, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: slow moving editwar between IPs and registered editors. The Banner talk 09:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full-protection: I would like to suggest that until the dispute on talk page about Menzel's version being a single is resolved the page receive a full protection until then so edit warring between editors will stop. Bumblebee9999 (talk) 21:52, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. FK Hajduk Kula page is in the last few weeks and months, often targeted by vandals. Especially vandals with those IP addresses 195.88.12.94 and 188.2.224.85 I don't know why they keep vandalising fk Hajduk Kula page, but it is obvious that editors and admins have to react. There is a similar problem on serbian wiki redaction, also with fk Hajduk Kula page https://sr.wikipedia.org/sr/%D0%A4%D0%9A_%D0%A5%D0%B0%D1%98%D0%B4%D1%83%D0%BA_%D0%9A%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%B0 , and serbian admins decided to protect the page. If we look up on history pages and see often content changes and erasing references, it is clear that admins and editors on english Wiki, have to rise up some sanctions.Ajdukovac (talk) 04:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined IP edits don't look like vandalism to me. This is a content dispute. Ϫ 07:50, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    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: /semi-protection - I reasoned with the admin who fully protected the article into August of this year, who cited the possibility of editors getting into the legal dispute in which Yank Barry was suing Wikipedia editors as the reason for protection; and refused to unprotect. This is a very dangerous precedent to set, where in the event of a legal dispute, the article is entirely blocked off from ALL editors except for administrators. The link that they cited was this. Not only was fully protection only briefly mentioned, it was dismissed almost outright. I propose unprotection/semi-protection due to there being no guideline/policy/against one of Wikipedia's pillars for full protection. If this is not solved here, I will be heading to WP:ANI. This is again a very nasty precedent to set and should have no place on Wikipedia; The third pillar states that editors are free to edit articles, and this is counterproductive to that. Tutelary (talk) 14:46, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection. The page was recently put under protection because of a perceived edit war between two users (self included). The reality was that this was over the continued inclusion of false and misleading information regarding the setting of the show. User:EvergreenFir and User:Fyvrael have insisted, inspite of cited info on the page from the creator of the series, that the show is set in New Jersey (the info cited says there is no particular setting). Protecting the page doesn't accomplish anything IMO. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 03:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Protection was applied through the closure of this 3RR case (permalink). As I noted in the closure, the alternative would have been to block both parties. Each user is totally convinced that they are right and that the only edit warrior is their opponent. EdJohnston (talk) 04:09, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    EdJohnston thank you for your closure of the AN3 report. I'm fine with the outcome and, as you say, removing protection will likely not result in anything constructive. I said on the article's talk page that if ChrisP2K5 decides to continue the edit war after protection is removed, I will not revert and simply file an ANI or similar report. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 04:24, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    EdJohnston, please review your decision and consider the entirety of the argument. EvergreenFir keeps adding incorrect information to the page, I keep restoring the correct info. He claims to have proof but it's mostly OR, and the citation I made is from an interview that directly refutes his claim. It's not an edit war, it's a user engaging in disruptive editing. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 05:53, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined. Please follow the dispute resolution avenues.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests
    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

    A rolling archive of the last seven days of protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Rolling archive.

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=615293205"