Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Unbinilium-322 Dibromide (talk | contribs) at 05:57, 7 May 2024 (Requesting protection for Israeli invasion of Rafah). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.

Requests for page protection

You are currently viewing the subpage "Current requests for increase in protection level".
Return to Requests for page protection.

Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – IPs and newly registered persistent removal of WP:NOTCENSORED content. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 12:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Will log at CTOPS. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Daniel Case: NOTCENSORED doesn't seem relevant here, given that the issue here is application of BLP. After reading the information in the article, the allegations were disproven, so having it so prominently in the lead (and spending so many bytes on it in the body, frankly) seems undue. The role of the lead paragaph in a BLP is to explain why the person is notable and this isn't it. Sdrqaz (talk) 02:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My protection was based on the fact that the article has been edited disruptively on the regular for well over a year. Daniel Case (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess what I'm trying to say is that what seems like disruptive editing (removals of content) is actually reasonable and compliant with our policies. Sdrqaz (talk) 03:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that needs to be discussed on the talk page, not in edit summaries. Daniel Case (talk) 03:36, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High risk being issued for OK today, please protect page for at least 48 hours. BryceM2001 (talk) 12:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. And really this sounds like a request for pre-emptive protection, which we almost routinely decline. Daniel Case (talk) 02:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reason: Frequent BLP vio and unconstructive editing Orchastrattor (talk) 13:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Two violations since 2 May. The violation prior to that was in March. Sdrqaz (talk) 02:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – The IP keeps requesting a review without addressing the issue. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Saqib has misused the rights as reviewer and is biased in his judgments as expressed in User_talk:Liz#Request_for_Investigation_of_User:Saqib. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 15:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These pages seriously need locking down because the IP keeps asking for re-reviews without addressing the issues raised on the relevant talk page which is akin to Wikipedia:DISRUPTIVE. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 18:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have not looked close enough to determine if a request to protect this draft is valid. However, I will say this IP is part of a larger UPE sock farm and we will be dealing with their bludgeoning of this draft (and others) unless a protection is made. And while it is unlikely to stop them, hopefully it will slow them for a while.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked: 182.182.0.0/17 (talk · contribs) blocked by Daniel Case. from the article for a week. Daniel Case (talk) 02:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – The IP keeps requesting a review without addressing the issue. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Saqib has misused the rights as reviewer and is biased in his judgments as expressed in User_talk:Liz#Request_for_Investigation_of_User:Saqib. 182.182.97.3 (talk) 15:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked: 182.182.0.0/17 (talk · contribs) blocked by Daniel Case. from the article for a week. Daniel Case (talk) 03:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 16:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Daniel Case (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Suggested by User:Mer764Wiki. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 17:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for mentioning me. Byt no seriously, Broadcasting stations are not a joke. mer764KCTV5 / Cospaw (He/Him | TalkContributions) 18:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Update: LITERALLY an minute after Mvcg66b3r's revert was reverted, that revert by the vandal was reverted by someone else. (Mvcg66b3r is not an vandal). mer764KCTV5 / Cospaw (He/Him | TalkContributions) 19:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. User:Alfamart KURWA blocked by PhilKnight. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:11, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reason: High level of IP vandalsim. Kansas Bear (talk) 21:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked: 166.205.124.91 (talk · contribs) blocked by PhilKnight.The Night Watch (talk) 01:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reason: Sustained IP vandalism/linkspam over last 48 hours. Editor switching IP after edits are rolled back. All come from 203.x.x.x which is a Hong Kong China Unicom (public mobile internet) domain.

Mark Six and Macau Jockey Club also need protection. I think a short period of semi-protection would be enough. Oblivy (talk) 23:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked: 203.160.64.0/19 (talk · contribs). Sdrqaz (talk) 02:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Vandalism on the day the protection expired. Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 00:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Case (talk) 03:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 02:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. The IP's /64 has been globally locked. The named account now says it's not registered on this wiki. Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reason: 103.108.60.153 Ullan364 (talk) 04:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Talk page disruption returned after I resumed edits and anti-vandal activities. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 05:13, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reason: An edit war is happening over whether to include "Unpledged electors" as a candidate in the election wikibox. There should be a revision of the edit and temporary protection to allow for a proper consensus over the issue to be reached. V. L. Mastikosa (talk) 05:46, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection: Persistent vandalism. Grabup (talk) 05:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reason: Currently unprotected but is a contentious topic, however, protecting it now might be preemptive protection. -322UbnBr2 (Talk | Contributions | Actions) 05:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]