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
NinthTail (talk | contribs)
136 edits
Requesting semi-protection of Jimmer Fredette.
Line 117: Line 117:
'''Temporary semi-protection:''' Persistent vandalism. <span style="border:1px solid #ffa500;background:#f3dddd;">&nbsp;[[User:I dream of horses|I dream of horses]]&nbsp;</span>{{small|([[User talk:I dream of horses|My talk page]]) ([[Special:Contributions/I dream of horses|My edits]])}} @ 03:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
'''Temporary semi-protection:''' Persistent vandalism. <span style="border:1px solid #ffa500;background:#f3dddd;">&nbsp;[[User:I dream of horses|I dream of horses]]&nbsp;</span>{{small|([[User talk:I dream of horses|My talk page]]) ([[Special:Contributions/I dream of horses|My edits]])}} @ 03:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
:{{Comment}} The vandalism seems to be only by one user ([[User:172.56.29.248|172.56.29.248]]), the user should be blocked instead of page protection. <span style="font-family:sans-serif; color:red">&mdash; <span style="font-weight:bold">[[User:Music1201|<span style="color:green"> Music1201</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Music1201|<span style="color:red">talk</span>]]</sup></span></span> 03:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
:{{Comment}} The vandalism seems to be only by one user ([[User:172.56.29.248|172.56.29.248]]), the user should be blocked instead of page protection. <span style="font-family:sans-serif; color:red">&mdash; <span style="font-weight:bold">[[User:Music1201|<span style="color:green"> Music1201</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Music1201|<span style="color:red">talk</span>]]</sup></span></span> 03:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

=== [[:Jimmer Fredette]] ===
* {{pagelinks|Jimmer Fredette}}

'''Semi-protection:''' Persistent vandalism – Violations of the [[WP:BLP|biographies of living persons policy]]. [[User:NinthTail|NinthTail]] ([[User talk:NinthTail|talk]]) 03:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


==Current requests for reduction in protection level==
==Current requests for reduction in protection level==

Revision as of 03:44, 21 April 2016

"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.

    Kirkenes–Bjørnevatn Line

    Indefinite move protection: Highly visible page. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 17:35, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Not sure why this is highly visible, but either way the move log is empty so I don't see any justification for move protection — MusikAnimal talk 19:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Education of the British Royal Family

    Full-protection: This page is about a celebrity family and seems to be suffering the effects of an influx of fanboy editors. It has attracted repeated, undiscussed blanking of sourced content, often content that is under active RfC debate. LavaBaron (talk) 18:11, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. MelanieN (talk) 02:20, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Patricia Driscoll (business executive)

    Full protection: Edit-warring, probable BLP violations. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:55, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined No edits to this page in a week — MusikAnimal talk 19:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Daryl Hannah

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. GABHello! 19:40, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    The Untouchable Tour

    Temporary create protection: Prevent this article from being created per WP:NTOUR until sufficient information and reliable sources come about. Interlude 65 (Push to talk) 20:26, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. The article exists. It apparently was created a few hours after your request. If you think it shouldn't exist, take it to WP:AFD. In any case, we would not create-protect a title like this; that function is used for articles that have been created and recreated multiple times. MelanieN (talk) 02:29, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    2016 FA Cup Final

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Qed237 (talk) 21:08, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. MelanieN (talk) 02:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Philosophical theism

    Temporary semi-protection: An unidentified user (IP address) keeps adding non-sourced material to the page and also material that is sourced, but has nothing to do with the page's subject. I asked him to discuss it on Talk page twice, but he ignored it. I have the feeling this is the beginning of an edit-war.Clausgroi (talk) 22:13, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 02:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:2016 NBA Playoffs

    Temporary pending changes: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – There are IPs that add unsourced (which is "future" contents), and one that reverts vandalisms. 333-blue 23:04, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Kepler exoplanet candidates by ESI

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – I nominated this list for deletion, but article owners keep removing the AfD tag. jps (talk) 23:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I also explained to the two editors, who apparently thought it was OK to remove an AfD tag. MelanieN (talk) 02:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Academy Park High School

    Temporary semi-protection: A wide array of IPs (at least some of whom appear to be used by the same vandal) have been vandalizing this high school article throughout the past two days, repeatedly recharacterizing it as "Bed Bug High" and the like. Julietdeltalima (talk) 23:49, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 02:39, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Ted Kennedy

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:10, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Curt Schilling

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 00:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    CGP Grey

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 00:40, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Rajiv Gandhi International Airport

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. - ✈Sunnya343✈ (talk) 01:04, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Methodist College (Kowloon)

    Temporary semi-protection for 7 days: Persistent vandalism due to current events in Hong Kong--1233thehongkonger (talk) 01:38, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Jon Ritzheimer

    Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. MB298 (talk) 01:43, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Fast 8

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – disruptive/vandalism. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 02:11, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Carson Wentz

    Semi-protection: Too many overly anxious fans adding their favorite team to this player's profile before the 2016 NFL draft. Please semi-protect until May 1 (which is when the NFL draft ends). bender235 (talk) 02:40, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Johnny Rockets

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 03:03, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Southeast Delco School District

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism.  I dream of horses (My talk page) (My edits) @ 03:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Comment: The vandalism seems to be only by one user (172.56.29.248), the user should be blocked instead of page protection. — Music1201 talk 03:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Jimmer Fredette

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Violations of the biographies of living persons policy. NinthTail (talk) 03:44, 21 April 2016 (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.

    Jesse Waugh

    Unprotection: Salted three years ago due to re-creation by a sock. However, I've discovered the article subject is actually notable and I want to write an article. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 00:20, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Do you have a draft article ready to move there? Like it suggests above, it's good to have an article already written up for a salted article subject so it's easily moved and to help confer notability. tutterMouse (talk) 13:40, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I do have an article in userspace that is pretty much GNG ready User:The_Master/sandbox3. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 00:37, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Looking at it, I think it needs far stronger third-party sourcing to pass WP:GNG and even more so given the field the subject works in (see WP:CREATIVE). If it'll be moved or not will be up to the admin who'll consider the request. tutterMouse (talk) 05:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I'd argue that GNG and CREATIVE are separate and that though it's marginal, it does satisfy the letter of GNG (multiple reliable sources...). Multiple is just more than one. But I'll leave it to you guys to determine. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 01:24, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Binge drinking

    Unprotection There are no discussions on the talk page discussing a move. In 2008 a bot put the move protection template on the page. I was unable to identify the admin who protected this page, so did not ask anyone, but since protection has been in place for 8+ years I think this is an appropriate place to ask. Protection ought not be in place for this long without a good reason, and I am unable to identify any reason for keeping this or any vandalism about a move. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:27, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    KrakatoaKatie Can you tell me - what is the quickest way to identify the admin who did the protection, and the quickest way to identify the times when a move was attempted? Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:22, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bluerasberry: Sure! Each page and user has logs for protection, deletion, blocks, and so forth, and the {{pagelinks}} and {{userlinks}} templates conveniently contain a link to the public log. It's up above in this very section. You can filter by the kind of log you want to see. There's a caveat here, though - if the page was deleted and recreated, the logs won't always carry forward depending on how the recreation was done. Before we had revdel we had to delete the whole page and selectively restore versions (which was a real PITA for pages with hundreds of edits), and that's what was done in this case so the logs did carry forward. Likewise, sometimes the logs (particularly the protection log) don't always move with a page, and I have no idea why. But there they are. :-) Katietalk 14:49, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    KrakatoaKatie I see - thanks. I have hardly experimented with this.
    Other questions:
    1. Can you help me interpret part of the log? It says that on March 7 2014 Graham87 restored the page. There seems to be no record of anything being deleted, so why is there a record of a restoration? Is there another deletion record somewhere?
    2. What seems to be the last move was done in 2008. I think you are calling the person doing the vandal move an IP, when actually they seem to be a registered account which is not autoconfirmed. Nowadays accounts which are not autoconfirmed cannot move pages, but they used to be able to do so, right? If that is correct, we still now have protection from this kind of vandalism without page protection, right?
    3. It is not bad in general to use indefinite page protection? I am just seeing one case of vandalism in the logs, and the response has been 8 years of protection. I am not aware of other factors to consider. Is indefinite protection a standard response in this case? Maybe the admin who protected has more information but I do not see more.
    Thanks for any comments you can give to help me better understand general rules and practices for this case and future ones. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:02, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Absolutely. The page logs can be fascinating. I'd move this to your talk, but I think it's relevant to the discussion and might help some other users. :-)

    • Graham87 restored some normal vandalism that he felt shouldn't have been deleted when NawlinWiki had to delete and restore the page. It's the equivalent of restoring the visibility of something that was revdel'd.
    • Here is the move log. See the redlink to Binge drinking is awesome. No, really.? That was the target of the move. Page moves are edits, and they show in the edit history. I should be able to see deleted versions, but I can't, so it's likely there were more page moves to targets containing profanity or BLP issues that have been oversighted.
    • What I was saying in my very first comment was that the last IP edit, this one, was an attempt to change the title.
    • You're correct that non-autoconfirmed accounts can't make moves, but we used to have a lower threshold for autoconfirmed status (can't remember what it was). The account that made this page move was possibly Grawp and it was autoconfirmed when the vandalism occurred (it has deleted contributions that you can't see). That was Grawp's MO, as I recall - he would create the socks months prior, then make a few edits the day he wanted to strike. I know WoW used to do that.
    • There are a few rare cases where indef full protection is necessary, some pages where indef semi-protection is necessary, and many more cases where indef move protection is necessary. (There's a unprotect discussion in the RFPP logs and at WP:AN right now about one of them.) It's almost always applied after an escalating length of protection hasn't ended the disruption. I've done it a few times (you can look in my protection log - there's a link on my user page) but I usually limit my edit semi-protects to one year. My tolerance is much lower for BLPs. I don't put up with much nonsense on BLPs and I think most admins feel the same.

    I think that covers all your questions. If not, smack me with the trout and I'll try again. ;-) The protection log shows that the page was edit semi-protected for twelve days, which expired as expected, and indefinitely protected from moves. If you want to move the page to another title, make your case and we'll consider it. Otherwise, I can't think of a reason why the page should be moved. Katietalk 16:14, 20 April 2016 (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.

    Handled 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=716322230"