Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Requesting semi-protection of List of NHL outdoor games broadcasters. (TW)
No edit summary
Line 139: Line 139:
'''Temporary semi-protection:''' Persistent vandalism. [[User:Hirolovesswords|Hirolovesswords]] ([[User talk:Hirolovesswords|talk]]) 02:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
'''Temporary semi-protection:''' Persistent vandalism. [[User:Hirolovesswords|Hirolovesswords]] ([[User talk:Hirolovesswords|talk]]) 02:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)


=== [[:2011 NHL Winter Classic]] ===
* {{pagelinks|2011 NHL Winter Classic}} Persistent vandalism. [[Special:Contributions/172.56.38.35|172.56.38.35]] ([[User talk:172.56.38.35|talk]]) 02:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Temporary semi-protection:''' Persistent vandalism. [[User:Hirolovesswords|Hirolovesswords]] ([[User talk:Hirolovesswords|talk]]) 02:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
==Current requests for reduction in protection level==
==Current requests for reduction in protection level==
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/URheading}}
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/URheading}}

Revision as of 02:09, 12 February 2016

    Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.

    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


    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.


    Semi-protection: Currently there is some major confusion over whether or not certain pieces of information should be included in the infobox or not. Considering how important an article like this is in relation to the elections, wikipedia should strive to remain neutral. We are having major problems with people wanting wikipedia to be a "crystal ball". JP16103 05:25, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. MelanieN (talk) 20:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Unsourced and disruptive edits from dynamic IP and sockpuppets. Qed237 (talk) 15:34, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 01:16, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Intentional disruptive editing – Requesting this article be protected ASAP from IPs. I have no faith the current IP with a mission will stop with only this round of disruption as long as the article is in the process of GA review. The IP geolocates to the Bronx, NY (very possibly the same one that's been following me from article to article attempting to get me in to edit war for months) has just undone the work at the article I did last night, knowing I am on a 1RR restriction and cannot revert what they did. I would see this as vandalism since the "edit" has taken everything I improved according to suggestions at the GA review and undid them. Others might not see it as vandalism, so I'm not taking a chance at going beyond my 1RR restriction (as vandalism would be an exception to the restriction). Would appreciate protection at least until the GA review is done. Am pinging Ritchie333 and Drmies as they are both familiar with my restriction (and possibly this IP). -- WV 16:38, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    "I can't revert war so no one else should edit the page." LOL. 107.107.62.241 (talk) 16:42, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    As a neutral observer, it's my view that this post alone is proof enough that WV's suspicions are not unfounded regarding the bad faith with which this IP user is editing. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) (My talkpage) 16:47, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    The change I made is good, but someone disagrees solely for the sake of disagreeing. Who is truly the disruptive one in this case? (Hint: the one attempting to own the page and game the system) 107.107.62.241 (talk) 16:50, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    You are clearly trolling WV with your previous post to this page, and I've left a warning on your IP talkpage to that end. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) (My talkpage) 16:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it's now obvious this IP vandal troll (who very well could be a known WP:LTA IP that geolocates to the Bronx and NYC) is following me. A pox upon them! "LOL" -- WV 16:44, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – With the album being released today there has been a number of nonsense edits. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:47, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment: I suggest a month of protection. This is also the second wave of vandalism and unsourced content from IPs for the article. Aria1561 (talk) 20:40, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: I'd just like to update to any admin scrolling through this page that I've had to revert about 50+ edits with unsourced material added by IPs. Thank you for your consideration. Aria1561 (talk) 00:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 01:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary protection: Persistent vandalism. Serols (talk) 18:52, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 01:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Not sure why this page is attracting so much vandalism and confused edits over the last day but it may need to be looked into. Hama Dryad (talk · contribs · email) 19:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 01:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Continuous editing over a content dispute, despite talk page discussion trying to find a solution. Tvx1 20:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Edit warring is by this editor now requesting full protection to enshrine their position. Other editors (including me) compromised and added cites to infobox. Full explanation in talk. Legacypac (talk) 20:23, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Contest above statement. I have request full protection so that we can allow the talk page discussion to run its course. The above editor and Lipsquid have been editing the article repeatedly over the last 24 hours over disputed content despite the talk page discussion and there not being evidence of a consensus for their position at all. That can be considered disruptive. The only aim of my edits and this request is to restore and stabilize the consensus version of that article that had now, for the disputed content, existed for about two months. Tvx1 20:50, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    This request is another form of edit warring started by T on the 9th where they willfully breached 1RR in less then an hour ignoring the huge warnings. Legacypac (talk) 21:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    This request page is not the place to accuse other editors of "willfully breaching 1RR". I can also confirm that this request by User:Tvx1 is being made totally in good faith. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined for now, at least. Hopefully enforcement of 1RR will work instead. Floquenbeam (talk) 01:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: A persistent IP-hopping long-term disruptive editor that has necessitated protection of this article in the past has returned as soon as the last protection expired. Deli nk (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Karst (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes, persistent over a 24+hour period by various IPs and vandal-only accounts. -- WV 23:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content. Elizium23 (talk) 22:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: There is currently an on-going discussion of the maps used on this page, and consensus has been reached regarding some of them. At least two IP users and one new user (perhaps all the same person) have been adding alternative maps and removing the maps that have gained consensus without engaging in discussion. The user(s) claim that the maps are unsourced, but that is incorrect. The user(s) have been engaging in this activity now for several days, despite reversions by multiple editors, so protection would be appreciated. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 23:16, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: High level of recent IP vandalism and addition of unsourced content to lead. Melcous (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced information by IP editors. Bbb2007 (talk) 23:30, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated attacks from IPs. Emotionalllama (talk) 23:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Edit warring from user who will not provide reliable sourcing. --Another Believer (Talk) 23:44, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary Semi-protection: Alterations being being made by User: Cls14 based on subjected opinion and believed by the less charitable amongst us on behalf of the owner of the establishment mentioned in the amenities section for commercial interests.149.254.218.85 (talk) 00:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Various IPs reverting to push claims published by the subject's own publication which have been contradicted by reliable sources cited here. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 00:45, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent IP and non-autoconfirmed accounts. Two of these accounts have been blocked as vandalism-only accounts. With this in mind, the socking is likley to continue. 172.56.38.35 (talk) 01:11, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Disruptive editing, multiple vandalism editions and issues by unregistered users.TheBellaTwins1445(talk) 3:56, February 10, 2016 (UTC)

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. MelanieN (talk) 01:14, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: IP continues edit warring copyvio into article, talk page discussion not productive. Geogene (talk) 01:33, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hirolovesswords (talk) 01:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hirolovesswords (talk) 02:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hirolovesswords (talk) 02:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    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

    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.

    Handled requests

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