Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Steve Gough (talk | contribs) at 14:20, 28 February 2010 (→‎Current requests for protection). 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.


    ====Leeds Arena (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)==== "Temporary Semi Protection" , potential vandalism and an anonymous user putting their opinions (unsourced) into the article. This user has been blocked once already by wiki amins and talk on the discussion has attempted to resolve this over the past week. Administrators have removed said content, although this this continues to be added once user is unblocked. Temporary semi protection required to resolve matter and to allow users to agree a resolution..

    semi-protection vandalism, Page is being vandalised by non-users.  glennb28  t/c  10:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection due to persistent vandalism, spamming and edit wars done by Lekas123 even after the page is being reverted and restored. - Hezery99 (talk) 10:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Vandalism after unprotection. Falcon8765 (talk) 07:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection, Constant deletion of Kosovo under where it is official. -- Al™ 06:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary Semi-protection Apparently, something happened with the game tonight that's ticked off a whole bunch of players, and they're putting their opinions (and unsourced forum outrage) into the article. Dayewalker (talk) 05:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Protected to encourage discussion on talk page, rather than further edit warring. As non-autoconfirmed users were participating in the edit war, I went with fully protection, as otherwise it would seemingly endorse a specific version. Taelus (talk) 10:32, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, High IP vandalism , irresponsible & proof-less info's added & the article look's like a playground of IP's . Kindly Check & confirm the issue . Im struck on how to fix the article . No way one could save it with IP's in business .

    regards . Doctor muthu's muthu wanna talk ? 05:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - Low volume of recent edits from IP users. Engage/warn those that break policy as appropriate. Indefinite protection would be overkill here. Taelus (talk) 10:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Review of recent anonymous edits shows only vandalism, nothing contructive. Stillwaterising (talk) 04:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Taelus (talk) 12:45, 28 February 2010 (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.

    Unprotection - Sporadic content disputes should not be resolved with indef semi. Please unprotect. 124.100.40.131 (talk) 11:02, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection - Three years on, redirect page is indefinitely protected, while pointed-to article is not. Indefinite didn't seem like a wise decision at the time. Can we unprotect please? 124.100.40.131 (talk) 08:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection - Seems like the isolated disruption bursts could have better been addressed by targeted blocking rather than a blanket and indefinite semi. Please let's give it another try. Thank you. 124.100.40.131 (talk) 08:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection - current event article has had {{editprotected}} and {{edit-semiprotected}} templates on its talk page for more than half a day. Old alarming-looking tsunami map needs to be replaced by the one reflecting reality. 99.191.75.124 (talk) 08:26, 28 February 2010 (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.

    Would an admin be kind enough to rename this article to "Napoleon I", dropping the "of France" from the title, or unprotected it so others could. The article is currently protected preventing others from doing so. The article was frequently vandalized in the past, so unprotected should probably not be done. However, a consensus was found here Talk:Napoleon_I_of_France#Title_:_Napoleon_of_France_.3F to rename the article. If nothing else, please give a reason that this can't be done, or what action needs to be taken for this to be done. Thanks. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 17:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Done Article moved. —Jeremy (v^_^v Boribori!) 21:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks you! But you don't seem to have moved the associated talk page. Could you check that out? —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 21:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    Semi-protection Repeated vandalism, such as this, which remained on the page for nine hours. Cunard (talk) 05:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mfield (Oi!) 05:30, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection - One year on, can we give it another try please? The levels of disruption at the time did not seem to justify indefinite protection anyway. Thank you. 124.100.40.131 (talk) 01:40, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Agree that the history of the article would not seem to merit indef, especially as the vandalism has been mostly nuisance vandalism rather than anything more serious. Have unprotected it and will watch. Mfield (Oi!) 05:15, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Kolindigo (talk) 04:58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Try a longer period this time, hopefully once the olympics have ended, things will settle down. Mfield (Oi!) 05:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


    Temporary full protection vandalism, years of weird grammar/POV vandalism by the same person on various dynamic IPs over years. request extended semi protection. Theserialcomma (talk) 01:23, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of two months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Malinaccier (talk) 02:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection, IP (on dynamic address) repeatedly adds information to this page regarding a different person of the same name, and apparently fails to grasp the concept of 1 article 1 page, despite talk page messages, hat note, full edit summaries and anything else I could think of to make it easy. Perhaps a semi-protect would make the IP think about what they are doing before re-adding, or at least log in and allow a communication line to be established via a static user talk page. The info repeatedly added regarding the artist is now also in it's own article - it would be nice if another established editor were to revert it from this article this time so IP editor can see I'm not just staging a private war. ClubOranjeT 01:12, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Malinaccier (talk) 01:58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semiprotection vandalism. Important information, such as the results of the last two opinion polls, were inexplicably erased (maybe because of Dilma Rousseff's rapid growth). A candidate from a smaller party has been included on the infobox, even though he is unknown by most Brazilians (his name is not even cited in the polls). Users keep changing the PSDB/Democrats coalition from "centre-right" to "centre" without naming reliable sources. Germano Rigotto is no longer a candidate, since his party, PMDB, has publicly commited to an alliance with PT. He also can no longer trade parties to run for Presidency, since the law does not allow him to do so (as explained on the article Brazilian general elections, 2010). It seems to me right-wing users from Brazil has nothing better to do than vandalize this article. — Rodrigogomesonetwo (talk) 22:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Malinaccier (talk) 01:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semiprotection vandalism. Song has seemingly gone viral after being featured in the flash game "Robot Unicorn Attack", leading to unconstructive edits, and without temporary protection it's likely to get much worse. — Gavia immer (talk) 00:52, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Malinaccier (talk) 01:54, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Various IP's keep adding unsourced and false info to the article. TJ Spyke 22:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of five days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Malinaccier (talk) 01:51, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection spambot target, Seems to be a target of IP-spammers as of late. ScienceApologist (talk) 21:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Malinaccier (talk) 01:50, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Tired of reverting the vandalism on my userpage. Falcon8765 (talk) 07:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. With pleasure. -- Hoary (talk) 07:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Seems to be a target of every idiot with an IP address. At least eight vandalism attacks in the last 12 hours on a BLP. J DIGGITY (U ¢ ME) 21:19, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This has been protected so many times before it will probably end up with indef protection exentually. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Continuous Vandalism for over two months. SMP0328. (talk) 21:05, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    You must really be on on strike in order to protect this article. SMP0328. (talk) 00:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection vandalism: Anonymous users along with a registered one (User:Diegrane) are making an identical erroneous edit repeatedly. They're claiming the word paella is a Valencian word despite the fact that citations prove otherwise

    [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

    Also, this is occurring even though an admin placed a temporary semi block on the article recently [6] because of this problem. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Not enough recent activity, and you seem to be mistaking the meaning of WP:VANDALISM. This is a content dispute, discuss on talk and/or pursue dispute resolution. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:32, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I couldn't disagree with you more. I believe the above diffs speak for themselves. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 00:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection vandalism. The High Fin Sperm Whale 21:54, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck ° needs to be running more often 22:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


    Temporary semi-protection spambot target, IPs are targeting this article for insertion of spam-based external links. ScienceApologist (talk) 20:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — ξxplicit 20:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=346883283"