Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by NastalgicCam (talk | contribs) at 14:54, 5 June 2010 (Requesting semi-protection of Tay Zonday. (TW)). 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, Lots of vandalism to this page in the last 5 days. Various internet forums seem to be reporting him as dead. Likely to continue until a statement is released, at which point it will still likely continue. -CamT|C 14:54, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi protection repeated WP:BLP violations. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Some IP users do not comply with the notes of editing this article, these notes are shown at the start of article's body and indicated clearly, but they always ignore them. ★XJMsa 13:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:53, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Continuing vandalism. Worse than last time's wave. It's an article about a hate-it-or-love-it type of popular music, I might add which generally explains these constant vandalism edits. . GunMetal Angel 12:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection - vandalism. Recently released high-profile video game. Suggesting a two week semi-protect to allow the article some cool down. --Teancum (talk) 11:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reprotected, since it's basically a continuation of the same problems since the previous 1 week protection expired on the 21st of May. The fact it's recently released and a high traffic article also encouraged me to protect here, as we should be providing quality content to those interested rather than risking vandalism, as it is high in volume on this page. Thanks for listing it here, Taelus (Talk) 11:46, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Edit warring. Please also see User talk:Moocha#Kochari - at least one of the involed parties seems to be a reasonable person. Moocha (talk) 10:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:04, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:76.103.27.48 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Temporary semi-protection user talk of blocked user, To coincide with the length of the block, although you might want to extend the block given the offender's continued racially biased and personally attacking posts.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:59, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. Courcelles (talk) 05:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you!   — Jeff G. ツ 05:27, 5 June 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.==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-protection vandalism Derogatory, anti-gay editing from sockpuppets that has to constantly be reverted. This is one of the few remaining same-sex marriage articles that lacks any protection. Native94080 (talk) 04:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. SlimVirgin talk contribs 05:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection vandalism, Unbearable ammounts of vandalism (and genre warring... ect.). . GunMetal Angel 04:48, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Sorry to say, this apge seems to attract nothing but vandalism, but just not enough of it to justify protection. I'll add it to my watchlist to keep another pair of eyes on it, though. Courcelles (talk) 06:08, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Google Doodle on 5th June, lot of people coming in vandalising. 2-3 days semi-protection should do it eZio (talk) 04:30, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin talk contribs 05:59, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Current spate of IP vandalism from several addresses - maybe 3 day semi protection to see if it stops?. Jminthorne (talk) 04:12, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin talk contribs 06:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Vandalism and confusion. KzKrann (talk) 03:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin talk contribs 06:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite full protection, A page on this alleged university has been created and deleted twice. If you check the first deleted version, you'll see it's claimed that this supposed university was founded in 1955 and that its president was appointed by the Pope. Google shows it has absolutely no history, and WHOIS shows that its domain was registered about five weeks ago. They are allegedly accredited by a "Theology Education Council Accreditation Commission" (the "TECAC" of the article creator's username), but that too doesn't exist and its website also was registered in April. Given the obvious effort that's gone into their website [1] (which includes bogus claims like "University of St. David is ranked #1 nationally for the total number of students who study abroad"), I have no doubt this is an absolute fraud. It's the second fake university I've seen, in fact; the other was the "University of N&Z West." Suggest speedy delete and indefinite page protection. See also deleted revisions of the talkpage for my discussion with the creator, who put forth no explanation whatsoever for the obvious fakeness of his university.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 03:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected. SlimVirgin talk contribs 06:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism. The High Fin Sperm Whale 03:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This was a borderline case; not a huge amount of vandalism, but it's an FA and it's getting an unusual amount of vandalism. I have a hunch (and hope) that the impetus to vandalise this page will dissipate as the anniversary (May 18) recedes into the past. --Orlady (talk) 03:42, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. 95j (talk) 02:26, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin talk contribs 02:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection, unsourced information has repeatedly been added to the article. Heavyweight Gamer (talk) 02:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    (ec) Semi-protected for one week, but it's worth noting that the sentence being reverted to—"However, who she will be voicing remains unknown"—is also unsourced.
    HJM, you changed the protection I'd added; not sure whether you intended to. SlimVirgin talk contribs 02:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Apologies, no, that wasn't my intent- we must have had the protection screen open at the same time- I've reverted myself. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, no worries. SlimVirgin talk contribs 02:30, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection, a number of IPs have been adding unsourced information lately. Heavyweight Gamer (talk) 02:03, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Repeated vandalism. KzKrann (talk) 01:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary create-protection, Repeated recreation of title. Merle|Lang 01:12, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

    Declined, it hasn't existed since November 2008. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Loads of IP vandalism to a BLP including changes to place of birth and insertion of a fictional girlfriend. DuncanHill (talk) 00:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:18, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi Protection. Subject of ongoing anti-Semitic attacks by IPs, most recently a vexatious PROD. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 23:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. As to the PROD, I'm actually inclined to agree with the IP who placed it. Not all edits from IPs are bad. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    That's the same IP which has been adding anti-Semitic slurs to the article; hence there is 'recent disruptive activity'. All edits by that account are anti-Semitic. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:24, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry, but 2 disruptive edits in 5 days is not enough to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi Protection hopefully for 2-??? Months, Ive had this page protected a few times already, others have too. The protection got off today and Ive already reverted vandalism twice and warned two different users. ..:CK:.. (talk2me) 22:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected 2 months it is, then. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:51, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection - ongoing vandalism, presumably by various children related to article subject. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:23, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Willking1979 (talk) 21:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection - vandalism. Connormah (talk | contribs) 18:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection, Same situation as at Gaza flotilla raid. Should be lifted when overall editing intensity decreases or if there are other signs that unprotection is warranted.   Cs32en Talk to me  17:58, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Hopefully that will be enough time for it to calm down. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=366202166"