Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 82.42.237.84 (talk) at 17:48, 27 February 2008 (→‎Current requests for unprotection). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


"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.

    Brake (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi protect for 24 hours IP vandalism by 4 different IPs in the last few minutes. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 17:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    The New York Times (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Active IP vandalism, perhaps due to the increased publicity/media attention w/ the John McCain article they published. Temporary semi-protection requested..Cirt (talk) 17:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Mama's Family (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Temporary semi-protection I'm not exactly sure what is going on with this article, but a series of IP users in the range 143.205.x.x have been editing the article heavily for the last few days and adding questionable information (but not necessarily vandalism) to the article and have been quite nasty in edit summaries toward those who remove the additions. Hopefully, a temporary protection of the page will make him/her lose interest. Thingg⊕⊗ 17:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    List of SpongeBob SquarePants characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-Protection - Vandalism during the last days, some vandalism went unnoticed/unfixed for nearly a day. -- 78.50.24.136 (talk) 17:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    WrestleMania XXIV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-Protection - Heavy influx of non-registered users violating WP:CRYSTAL. The event is 1 month away and most wrestling shows are taped before they are aired. Hence the crystal balling. --Endless Dan 15:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:189.56.193.250 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    indefinite semi-protection User talk of blocked user.Magioladitis (talk) 14:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:212.248.240.1 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection User talk of blocked user.Magioladitis (talk) 14:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    John Zizioulas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Request extension to current page protection, as current dispute has not yet been resolved, and there is risk of edit-war resuming. Informal mediation has been unsuccessful in this dispute, formal mediation is pending. Seminarist (talk) 14:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. No edit warring since. Feel free to bring it back if it continues. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    There has been continued edit-warring over related Image:MZizijulas, which resulted in User:Cebactokpatop being blocked twice. Seminarist (talk) 14:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User:UzEE (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    indefinite cascading semi-protection Vandalism, The original page was semi-protected against vandalism. I was wondering how a recent anon vandal got through the protection here. The protected page was moved to a sub-page so I figure the protection also got moved. This new page was vandalized the first day it was created with the exact pattern as the previous vandal. Therefore I am requesting that this page be again granted semi-protection for an indefinite period.. UzEE  13:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Your userpages have never had cascading semi-protection. As I understand it, and as the protection policy says, cascading semi-protection has been disabled. This would not be an appropriate use for it either, but feel free to drop a list of any sub-pages you want semi-protected on my talk page and I'll go through them. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:ElectAnalysis (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    indefinite full protection User talk of blocked user.Magioladitis (talk) 13:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected Alexf42 13:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:DemocracyInAction (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    indefinite full protection User talk of blocked user.Magioladitis (talk) 13:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected Alexf42 13:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:DemocracyATwork (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    indefinite full protection User talk of blocked user.Magioladitis (talk) 13:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment: A user has requested an unblock of this user. Should not be protected until this is decided. Let more admins take a look on this one. -- Alexf42 13:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. and per above. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course he/she was no recent activity because he/she was blocked a month ago. Now there is the user has a new sockpupppet, User:DemocracyWorks, so the old account is better to be protected. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Ukraine2006 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    indefinite full protection User talk of blocked user.Magioladitis (talk) 13:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. also this account is not blocked (?) -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It was a sockputtet. Check Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/UkraineToday (3rd). -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:US-airport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Full protection for high risk template. Additionally, various single purpose accounts with very few edits have shown up and tried to add add their own company to the highly used template. --Dual Freq (talk) 12:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected Alexf42 12:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Microsoft Dynamics GP (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary full protection. This is the second request; the previous response was that there was not enough disruptive activity. At this point, the only activity on the article for some time is by users (IP, and CChungg) attempting to add an external vendor as a reference link. Despite requests (on the article's discussion page, on CChungg's talk page) for notability or how this vendor link doesn't violate WP:EL, there has been no adequate response given. At this point, the user is ignoring dialogue and just re-adding what is removed. Quaeler (talk) 11:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. by John Reaves. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Jat people (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    A user requested at my talk page [1] that this article should be semi protected due to raciest vandalism by anonymous IP's. King Lopez Contribs 11:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC) [reply]

    Hi guys, respectfully retract my request for semi-protection. There seems for the time being low activity this month by vandals. Therefore, I am afraid if we put a massive semi-protect tag at the top of the article it will only awake them again. Therefore, lets leave it for the time being, try to keep things quiet. I retract my request for semi-protection for time being.--Historian info (talk) 13:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined per Historian info. -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Nobu Matsuhisa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Semiprotect. Some vandals are removing content to the page, i request the semiprotection.--MisterWiki do ya want to speak me?, come there! - 04:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    The vandals are:
    • (cur) (last) 01:01, 27 February 2008 68.194.109.180 (Talk) (3,523 bytes) (→Restaurant reviews) *(undo)
    • (cur) (last) 01:01, 27 February 2008 68.194.109.180 (Talk) (3,546 bytes) (→NOBU Hong Kong)(undo)
    • (cur) (last) 17:01, 18 February 2008 66.178.239.58 (Talk) (3,875 bytes) (undo)
    • (cur) (last) 17:01, 18 February 2008 66.178.239.58 (Talk) (3,876 bytes) (undo)
    • (cur) (last) 20:49, 10 February 2008 151.48.180.227 (Talk) (3,875 bytes) (undo)
    • (cur) (last) 09:05, 9 February 2008 152.78.254.72 (Talk) (3,853 bytes) (undo)

    --MisterWiki do ya want to speak me?, come there! - 04:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    New York City Subway Cars

    R32 (New York City Subway car) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    R38 (New York City Subway car) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    R40 (New York City Subway car) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    R42 (New York City Subway car) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    R160A (New York City Subway car) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    R160B (New York City Subway car) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    Full protect edit war. These four pages have been edit warred for a little over a week regarding whether or not the R160 series cars will or won't replace them. As far as has been publicly stated from the MTA, nothing has been decided yet. Please protect R160A and R160B page too. Acps110 (talk) 03:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Avenged Sevenfold (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary semi-protection heavy IP vandalism. Grsz11 (talk) 14:57, 27 February 2008 (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.

    User talk: 82.42.237.84

    As an anon, my block has finished now, so I'm not sure my talk page should be locked now. --82.42.237.84 (talk) 17:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Jonathan Edwards (theologian) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    I don't even know if I'm allowed to request this as an anon, but this page has been sprotected since September 14 with no vandalism since then. Can it be unprotected? 128.12.103.70 (talk) 07:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Paul Harvey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    'unprotection'Enigma msg! 21:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 01:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for significant 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.

    Template:Film (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Would like to request uncontroversial edit to fully protected template to implement diff already specified on the talk page, in order to finish setting up a new task force for New Zealand. Many thanks! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 07:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Done Stifle (talk) 11:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Douglasfgrego (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Would like to request the entire contents of talk:Douglasfgrego be deleted/purged. I am going to be looking for a new job soon, and the talk:Douglasfgrego is the first to appear on a google search of douglasfgrego. The content within has the potential to negatively influence a hiring decision. Additionally, the account has been placed on indefinite block, there is no indication this block will be lifted, and the entry to which the exchange refers has been deleted. There is no benefit to Wikipedia in preserving this, and the detrimental effect on me is potentially massive. --76.15.160.99 (talk) 23:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Maybe that all should have been thought out before the user in question performed the actions that got it blocked. The page has a useful history, thus it will not be deleted, and I see no need to lift the protection due to the abuse of the talk page. – Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 07:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    After discussion with Gonzo Fan2007, we have agreed that if the IP agrees here to cease editing (and comply with his community ban) then User:Douglasfgrego will be deleted and User talk:Douglasfgrego will be courtesy blanked. Note that the right to vanish is confined to users in good standing, but we will offer this as a courtesy. Stifle (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Genmay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    I request that genmay redirect to HardOCP#General_Mayhem.

    I don't know the backstory with General Mayhem and Wikipedia, but I can see that it's protected because it's been vandalized and deleted repeatedly. Regardless, it makes sense to me for the article to redirect to HardOCP#General_Mayhem instead of not existing at all. A forum that has 22 million posts at least deserves a redirect to a paragraph that explains where it came from. OK, the users spam their forums for fun. I mean to say that there's an extant paragraph in the [H]ard|OCP article that has lived peacefully for some time, so it seems reasonable to redirect. Mbelisle (talk) 05:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Done —EncMstr 18:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    General Mayhem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    I request that General Mayhem redirect to HardOCP#General_Mayhem, for the same reason given above for genmay. Mbelisle (talk) 06:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Done —EncMstr 18:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    Naval ranks and insignia of the Russian Federation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semiprotection. Roitr is back, acting from various IPs. --One half 3544 (talk) 09:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - probably not enough, we'll see how it goes. ~ Riana ⁂ 09:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    ElgooG (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Much IP vandalism has occurred on this page during this past week. Especially under Bypassing Chinese censorship (3 recent incidents).Alex17 2007USA (talk) 03:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 09:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    7th Floor Crew (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, IP Vandalism through putting and reinserting unsourced names as well as other petty vandalism for several months. Neoyamaneko (talk) 08:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 09:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    User:Crum375 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Request semi-protect for user page and user talk page. I think this problem may be a little more long term than first thought (One of the previous vandals commented at my talk page here). Thanks, R. Baley (talk) 08:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - per WP:PROT policy for userpage only. I've not protected the talk page as this is only for extreme cases and the current level of vandalism does not warrant that. It's highly disruptive of normal communications - Alison ❤ 09:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Landmark Education (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary full protection Dispute, Check the protect logs and article history. Relatively soon after the last full-protect was removed on February 21, edit warring between multiple parties started up again, and is ongoing. There isn't really much progress being made on the talk page - suggest a full-protect for a longer period of time than the last time, and for a neutral uninvolved administrator to step in on the article's talk page and perhaps facilitate a more formal dispute resolution process between the parties involved..Cirt (talk) 23:04, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Only one reversion in last 70 hours. —EncMstr 02:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, understandable, though the article has a long history of active dispute problems with no semblance of actual progress in dispute resolution. I'll keep an eye on it and resubmit if dispute problems get worse/more active between the multiple editors involved. Cirt (talk) 05:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Skateboarding (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, IP vandalism has continued after recent unprotection.ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 02:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Shoe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism.- Master Bigode from SRK.o//(Talk) (Contribs) 02:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.   jj137 (talk) 02:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    List of earthquakes in the United Kingdom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Page getting a lot of attention due to recent earthquake felt across UK, a lot of IP vandalism.Roleplayer (talk) 01:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.   jj137 (talk) 02:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Elaich (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Constant blanking by a sockpuppeteering vandal with a grudge against myself and this user, in connection with another RPP for User talk:DietLimeCola.treelo talk 23:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 14 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —EncMstr 02:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:DietLimeCola (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Constant blanking by a sockpuppeteering vandal with a grudge against myself and this user.treelo talk 23:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —EncMstr 02:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    The Birthday Massacre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) & The Crüxshadows (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection User:Breathtaker is on the prowl again. He's removing cited genres from these pages. He's done it twice to Cruxshadows and once to Birthday Massacre in ther last day but if the past is any judge then he's about to hit these pages a bunch of times. He keeps jumping IP addresses so a block will not work unless it it is a block on all IPs that begin with 87.122. We need to nip this in the bud by semi protecting these pages. I really don't want to spend the next serveral hours waring with him.--Dr who1975 (talk) 16:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. on both. —EncMstr 02:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Racism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Endless anon vandalism in the last few days, related to Black History month perhaps?.Slp1 (talk) 01:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Malinaccier (talk) 01:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC).[reply]

    Rod Laver (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi protection An anonymous and incivil (see the edit summaries) editor keeps vandalizing this page with varying IP accounts, all from the UK. Please semi protect this page so that IP addresses cannot edit it. Thanks. Tennis expert (talk) 22:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 01:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Colorado Student Assessment Program (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi protection Under attack--high levels of vandalism, esp. in last hour. With several vandals either blocked or given final warnings, maybe this will quiet. JNW (talk) 00:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Tooj12 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    temporary semi-protection User talk of blocked user, Trolling user page...perhaps an hour or two?.Dust Filter (talk) 23:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Turned out not to be as big a problem as I thought it would be - so much for intuition. I humbly withdraw my request. Dust Filter (talk) 23:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Rio de Janeiro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    User Opinoso don´t respond to my messages about stop deleting a sourced and researched image I provided for the article Rio de Janeiro. He just stated on the history page that the picture is not aestethically good to the article, and "anyway, old flags are not important". Emerson

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=194454682"