Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RolandR (talk | contribs) at 23:36, 18 November 2008 (→‎{{la|David Bukay}}). 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.

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Multiple IPs have made the exact same edit to the article many times in the past few days. Blocking will do no good because the vandal has used many IP addresses. --Andrew Kelly (talk) 23:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary full protection Vandalism, This week is Lehigh-Lafayette week at Lehigh University and (I'm assuming in some shape or form) Lafayette College. This is a historic rivalry between the two colleges (as can be seen on the article pages) and it gets a bit...extreme. There has been quite a bit of vandalism already today on both articles and I'm expecting this to continue and probably rise through this Saturday (EST). I'd like to request protection of both pages for 5 days..NcSchu(Talk) 23:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, A lot of recent IP vandalism, after previous semi-protection expired.Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 22:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection - Daily IP vandalism

    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, I would reccommend protection for this page. It is extreamly likly to be vandalised and so protection would be benificial..Kirachinmoku (talk) 22:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    We do not preemptively protect pages. Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 22:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection - For the sake of transparency, this request was denied yesterday because there hasn't been enough vandalism recently. This article has now been vandalized 9 times today. In the recent past, there have been serious BLP issues, including false death reports and claims about Theis' sexual activities. I have been told that Theis has instructed viewers of his web show to vandalize his Wikipedia article, and the vandalism has been ongoing for several months. Semi-protection for as long as possible would be greatly appreciated. GaryColemanFan (talk) 22:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection , It seems that parts of this page are constantly being deleted by one user, then re-uploaded by another. I wouldnt say it was vandalism but there is cirtainly some dispute over the source of the information..Kirachinmoku (talk) 21:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, Experiences multiple vandalism attacks daily, and has for months..Grika Ⓣ 21:14, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protection Barely been two days since last semi-pro, already too much vandalism. IceUnshattered [ t ] 21:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. for a period of two weeks by Anonymous Dissident. لennavecia 21:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, heavy and persistent IP user vandalism, numerous changes, page blanking, etc. Would suggest edits only by registered users. Thank you.Yachtsman1 (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. لennavecia 20:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, heavy and persistent IP user vandalism after article was unprotected yesterday.♪TempoDiValse♪ 20:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. لennavecia 20:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism.Enigma message 19:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined--Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    There are something like 15 reverts in the last 40 hours. Not just a little up. Compare that to the 40 hours before that. Enigma message 20:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite full protection Vandalism, There are many vandalism only accounts created specifically to vandalize this page and advertise on it. Some of these are public i.p addresses, or done through proxies to hide the i.p addresses or create new accounts. Protecting this page is the only way to prevent more vandalism..Dudemeister1234 (talk) 19:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined--Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection , Continuous addition of unsourced information, constant disruption.DiverseMentality 18:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. لennavecia 19:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Jenna pls re look @ the page. When info is added Diverse reverts it. S/h is dominating the page. I added info and he reverted it. Others added info & DM reverted it. What is wrong with the associated acts that the 71 IP added? Thx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.91.250 (talk • contribs) 15:17, November 18, 2008 (UTC)
    Looking at the individual edits, there are several vandalisms. The others, while in good faith, were correctly reverted. How are the acts added to the infobox associated? لennavecia 20:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Well over 50% of recent edits are either vandalism or reverting of vandalism. Seems to get hit almost every day..Beeblebrox (talk) 18:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Averages only one or two vandalism edits per day. Seems to always be quickly reverted. Also, there are constructive IP edits and a several vandal talk pages are redlinks. Warn as appropriate. Re-request if vandalism becomes more frequent/unmanageable. لennavecia 19:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism, Vandalism from a lot of different IP accounts.Rtyq2 (talk) 17:47, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - auburnpilot talk 20:53, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection , POV sockpuppetry recommences almost immediately following the end of temporary protection.RolandR (talk) 17:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined There's been one edit today. لennavecia 19:04, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    But this article has a long history of arguably racist POV editing, almost certainly by the subject himself or a political ally. Whenever the protection is lifted, this resumes. If it's not protected today, it certainly will be tomorrow or the day after. Why not prevent all of the extra work, and put it under indefinite semi-protection. This will not affect the work of bona-fide editors (of whatever political sympathy), but will prevent the fly-by vandalism from anonymous or throwaway ad hoc IDs. RolandR (talk) 19:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Protection is not preemptive. لennavecia 21:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The guideline you link to above states: "Administrators may apply indefinite semi-protection to pages that are:… Biographies subject to persistent violation of the biographies of living persons or neutral point of view policies". That is exactly the situation here, which is why I requested the indefinite semi-protection. RolandR (talk) 23:36, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect High level of IP vandalism. JD554 (talk) 17:04, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Many constructive and good faith IP edits. لennavecia 19:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, Article is frequently vandalized by IP users. JaredInsanity (talk) 05:07, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Page protected Semi three months. The problem seems to have started this fall, so indefinite protection might be overkill. EdJohnston (talk) 05:50, 15 November 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.

    Your first article (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    tried to create the page your first article but unfortunately found it to be SALTed >_< - requesting this page be unSALTed and created with the content #REDIRECT WP:Your First Article, thanks! Wikify567 (talk) 10:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined We don't encourage links from the mainspace to Wikipedia project pages (Wikipedia:Avoid self references) and these links are protected to help new users target their new articles better and avoid speedy deletion. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 10:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for 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.

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    Semi-protect Most edits are IP vandalism. JNW (talk) 15:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. لennavecia 15:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect vandalism, this time this article is worthy of protection, there have been so much IP vandalism to this article i can't count it all, and there's a lot a recent vandalism too, like yesterday! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elbutler (talk • contribs) 07:27, November 18, 2008 (UTC)

    Declined There is quite a bit of vandalism here, but there are also constructive and good faith edits from IPs. I'll add it to my watch list. لennavecia 15:53, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Full Protection Many vandals have continuously washed out edits over months and the opening up today of the page has again resulted in continuous edit warring and vandalism. Semi protection is already there. I'm requesting full protection. Regards, Mrinal Pandey (talk) 13:04, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, first of all, please use the correct article name in requests. Then, the page has been semi-protected for approximately 30 minutes now. Let's see if this helps before going to full way. Regards SoWhy 13:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protect lots of disputes and vandalisim and such.

    Declined, I see a LOT of good (or good faith) work by at least one IP. SoWhy 13:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect vandalism, this time this article is worthy of protection, there have been so much IP vandalism to this article i can't count it all, and there's a lot a recent vandalism too, like yesterday! It's the same for List of iCarly episodes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elbutler (talk • contribs) 07:27, November 18, 2008 (UTC)

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. First article has only one edit today, in the latter IPs are helping with cleaning up the vandalism. SoWhy 13:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection extremeVandalism from various users. Page needs to be protected for a while. Page was blanked as well a some other related pages. There is a possiblity that one user has an personal hidden agenda regarding this and will contunue to vandalise / blank the page. (Electromechanic (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2008 (UTC))[reply]

    Already protected.. Dealt with as a part of closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lex Wotton. SoWhy 11:21, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection too much ongoing Vandalism from various IP users. Page needs to be protected for a while.Nissanaltima (talk) 08:47, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, all yesterday, nothing today, so there is no reason to act now. SoWhy 11:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


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

    should also be unSALTed and given same redirect as above. Wikify567 (talk) 10:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined We don't encourage links from the mainspace to Wikipedia project pages (Wikipedia:Avoid self references) and these links are protected to help new users target their new articles better and avoid speedy deletion. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 10:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

    ditto for new page Wikify567 (talk) 10:47, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined We don't encourage links from the mainspace to Wikipedia project pages (Wikipedia:Avoid self references) and these links are protected to help new users target their new articles better and avoid speedy deletion. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 10:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

    ditto for article page Wikify567 (talk) 10:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined We don't encourage links from the mainspace to Wikipedia project pages (Wikipedia:Avoid self references) and these links are protected to help new users target their new articles better and avoid speedy deletion. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 10:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, This page is linked on the main page and is a site of a lot of IP Vandals. Needs semi protection till its off the main page..Sidonuke (talk) 07:53, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, currently on Main Page, see WP:NOPRO. Level of vandalism is pretty normal for a main page FA, certainly not extreme. Kusma (talk) 07:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism. On going IP vandalism. Bidgee (talk) 07:49, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 07:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Target of tenditious editing by User:AndreaMimi, who has now been blocked for it, and has returned to edit from a variety of IP addresses..Mayalld (talk) 06:57, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. --slakr\ talk / 07:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect indefenitely - Vandalized 3 times done by Slemcal1 who is currently blocked, he also vandalized my talkpage three times. Starczamora also tried to vandalized it once. Wynchard Bloom (talk) 04:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. indefinitely by Hersfold —EncMstr (talk) 07:20, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


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

    Unprotection. I would like to leave a message for the user and I'm unable to do so. Vandalism has passed and unnecessarily protecting user pages is against WP:PROTECT -81.139.76.64 (talk) 07:23, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    COMMENT - Please do not unprotect my page without my consent, I have an IP stalker as you can tell from here [1]. If this IP needs to talk something over with me, they can either register an account, or do so at the relevant talk page. Dayewalker (talk) 07:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Not unprotected It's pretty obvious that there be some stalkifying going on, and requester's use of the WP:PROTECT shortcut makes this request doubly suspicious. --slakr\ talk / 07:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Please WP:AGF. It's becoming increasingly apparently to me that everyone assume the worst out of people with IP addresses. -81.139.76.64 (talk) 07:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    IP, please read my link above for more information on my stalker, and then tell me why I should be so welcoming of IP addresses. You seem to know your way around wikipedia, I'd suggest you register an account. In any case, I've made the changes, nothing more to see here. Dayewalker (talk) 07:45, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=252672401"