Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Juliancolton (talk | contribs) at 19:06, 17 February 2009 (→{{la|Jon Huntsman, Jr.}}: 1 day). 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, appears to be a range of IP addresses vandalizing the page . — Ched (talk) 18:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection continuing vandalism This article has experienced repeated and excessive vandalism by anon IP during the past year or so. The article has received temporary semi-protection on three occassions during that time. The most recent semi-protection began on February 6, 2009, and ended one week later. As the article's history section shows, the excessive vandalism resumed as soon as the semi-protection ended. Much of this vandalism adds obscenities. In one recent incident, an anon IP removed almost all of the article's content. Please therefore resume temporary semi-protection for a longer period of time than one week. Thank you. Corker1 (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, The article keeps being vandalized by anonymous users 89.242.158.217;cosistent adding of malicious unfair unsourced commentsBreuerman (talk) 17:52, 17 February 2009 (UTC)Breuerman[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, This page has been subject to serial vandalism from IP User:74.175.167.18, including obscenity and death threats against the American president. Based on past behaviour, the IP is likely to resume vandalism after his 31 hour block expires. May I suggest semi-protecting the page against edits by new and anon users for a while -- or extending the anon IP's block past 31 hours?. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Multiple anon users repeatedly adding back an unsourced, not widely recognised alternative term. Halsteadk (talk) 17:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for three days. Tan | 39 17:26, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection Excessive vandalism by IPs and new SPA accounts. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 16:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, once again this article is being vandalised in the same persistent manner that it was before being semi-protected. IP editors, from a different address every time add "and rj" to the article. It seems to be a game that would be stopped by semi-protecting the page again - this time for slightly longer - in the hope that the perpetrator will get bored and go back to his/her schoolwork. TimTay (talk) 15:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 16:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, The article keeps being vandalized by anonymous users; IPs are mostly vandalizing the article. Too much reverting. Also, the article has become a target of a lot recentism. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 15:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect. Persistent insertion of copyrighted material, including via block-evading sockpuppets. Chubbles (talk) 14:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. rootology (C)(T) 14:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Constant, perennial IP vandalism. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:48, 17 February 2009 (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.

    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.

    Needs updating with sandboxed template. Cheers! PC78 (talk) 16:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    semi-protection vandalism. Ben (talk) 10:17, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 10:28, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection vandalism, The same editor, using several different ip addresses, is continuing to place libelous material on this page despite constant requests by other editors to stop. It seems they have an axe to grind and nothing will keep them from it. Monkey Bounce (talk) 10:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked.. Seemed to come a very limited range of IPs, I placed a month-long range-soft-block on them. Regards SoWhy 10:26, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey, that was quick. Thanks for your attention in this matter.Monkey Bounce (talk) 10:28, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Perennial anon vandalism multiple times a day whenever this is unprotected. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, seems to have been a spark around 02:00 (UTC) with no further activity afterwards. SoWhy 10:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Page subjected to heavy vandalism. -- Tinu Cherian - 08:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, single user only, report for block if needed. SoWhy 08:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see reverts of many IP contributions from early this month before the said user vandalism -- Tinu Cherian - 08:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Early this month = Not now. We do not protect pages just because there was once vandalism, we protect them to avoid further vandalism based on what is happening now. There is no indication of any vandalism besides the single user mentioned, so blocking is the preferred method of dealing with it. Regards SoWhy 10:18, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protection Nearly thirty obscene, racist, or total deletion vandalizations over past ten days, all by IPs. Monkeyzpop (talk) 02:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. by Anonymous Dissident (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). SoWhy 07:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    For one week. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 08:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection until June 2009 for vandalism. For some reason, this article has attracted a lot of IP vandalism. I have reverted and protected the article for a week, but I think the trend is coming from school projects. I wrote the article and it's probably not a good idea for me to partially protect indefinitely. --Moni3 (talk) 23:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, might be the case but it's currently quite quiet and under control. I suggest re-evaluation if reverting does not work anymore. Regards SoWhy 08:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protection, long history of IP and newbie vandalism. Previous protects have expired. --Dmol (talk) 07:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 07:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Heavy IP vandalism. This article has been repeatedly protected against vandalism, but it doesn't seem to help all that much.. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 06:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 07:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:124.177.165.251 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Temporary semi-protection user talk of blocked user, user keeps adding insults to editors on talk page. CardinalDan (talk) 06:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected until block expires. SoWhy 07:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    full protection dispute, The pages Yazidi and Melek Taus are total temp protected, which is set to expire in six hours; however, there has been little further discussion on the issue of consensus and I am positive the edit war will resume at the expiration of protection. Please renew protection to prevent edit warring as the conflict is most definitely not over. Ogress smash! 06:26, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. SoWhy 07:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    full protection dispute, The pages Yazidi and Melek Taus are total temp protected, which is set to expire in six hours; however, there has been little further discussion on the issue of consensus and I am positive the edit war will resume at the expiration of protection. Please renew protection to prevent edit warring as the conflict is most definitely not over. Ogress smash! 06:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. SoWhy 07:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect. Numerous IP vandalism. JustSomeRandomGuy32 (talk) 05:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 07:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, In the last week, this page has had more than fifty edits and you can count on less than one hand those edits that were actually constructive, as opposed to IP vandalism or edits reverting that vandalism. Thanks for any help. 132 04:16, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 07:49, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:SMP0328. (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, User:173.48.207.13 has twice vandalized my user talk page. I request my user talk page be semi-protected for 48 hours. SMP0328. (talk) 03:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, user talk pages are not protected except in cases of severe vandalism. SoWhy 07:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection Sustained anon vandalism from many sources. Steven Walling (talk) 02:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected —Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=271394525"