Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MikeNicho231 (talk | contribs) at 17:44, 22 December 2010 (Requesting semi-protection of D. (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.

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

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism. MikeNicho231 (talk) 17:44, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Temporary semi-protection, IP abuse. ~NerdyScienceDude 17:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Blocked 192.148.117.80/29 for 31 hours. Courcelles 17:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect. High level and persistent IP vandalism. John Cengiz talk 16:44, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 72 h, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 16:52, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    David Guetta discography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection, edit-warring Anonymous IPs keep inserting chart-positions which cannot be verified with the source(s) provided, and they don't seem to care to provide a source for those position(s) even after I have reverted their edits number of times briefly explaining in the edit-summary that the positions they insert have to be verifiable. Hopefully, semi-protection will force them to engage in a discussion at the talk-page of the article.--Harout72 (talk) 16:41, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 16:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

    create-protection, repeatedly recreated. WuhWuzDat 16:26, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected. Courcelles 16:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Your Hero Is A Villain (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Indefinite create-protection, Repeatedly recreated after speedy deletion. —KuyaBriBriTalk 16:24, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected. Courcelles 16:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect. Persistent violations of BLP. TM 16:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 90 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 16:13, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Indefinite create-protection, repeatedly recreated spam/copyvio magnet. WuhWuzDat 15:58, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected. Courcelles 16:14, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Early childhood education (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protect. Spree vandalism target from multiple editors. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 15:24, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. by DragonflySixtyseven (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Courcelles 16:15, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Wizards of Waverly Place (season 4) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Temporary semi-protection, Persistent addition of uncited content with a recent spike in vandalism. AussieLegend (talk) 15:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 17:41, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection. Temporary semi protection requested. Persistent vandalism. Multiple IP editors. --GnoworTC 12:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 12:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Nick Dal Santo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Currently involved in controversy. As a result page is being heavily vandalised. Jevansen (talk) 10:29, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 12:27, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    NMCB 3 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Temporary full protection vandalism, Seems to be getting a concerted vandal attack by a number of registered users - maybe a short block will dissuade them?. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:43, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    We also have an IP reverting the removal of a blatant bit of POV. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:10, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined Just look like some of the troops having a bit of childish fun. The registered accounts are blocked, the IP probably got caught in the autoblock, and things seem to have settled down. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 12:19, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Sorry Xymmax, protection clash. Feel free to unprotect if you like. GedUK  12:21, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    The registered accounts are not all blocked - only two of them are. And "just a bit of childish fun" is not an excuse for concerted mass-vandalism, especially as it has been going on for several days - if you look at the history, you can see it's causing quite some aggravation. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:28, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Apologies - I didn't refresh my check on the registered users properly. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Temporary full protection vandalism, Full protection until anon/user:SydWaterways decide to stop blanking sections without reason. Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:07, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 12:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Kandahar (2010 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Temporary Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism, multiple vandal attacks from multiple ips. Arfazph (talk) 14:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:18, 22 December 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.

    Peter T. King (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Please consider semi-protection or unprotection. Protecting Admin. declined. There was no 3RR nor much of an edit war except perhaps 1 edit by an Anon after apparently King Supportive(User pages bias and talk page history)Editors,RepublicanJacobite and 303 , reverted RS content once each. Mr.Grantevans2 (talk) 03:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    Please reject this request out of hand, or better still extend the protection to indefinite per the reasons I am about to give. The actual story, as opposed to the work of fiction above, is as follows. I removed material as unsuitable for inclusion in an article about a living person, explaining why on the talk page. In addition to an IP editor edit warring without discussion, Mr.Grantevans2added back the Wikileaks information without attempting to discuss the issue and gain consensus for inclusion (unless you count this, which most people wouldn't). This was reverted by me, again with a full explanation. After the IP editor again reverted me without even attempting to discuss the issue, they were reverted by RepublicanJacobite and the page was fully protected. You will see at Talk:Peter T. King#Various edits reverted there is still a total failure by Mr.Grantevans2 to even discuss the issue, instead trying a protected edit request (which failed), a request to the protecting admin (which failed, and he was told "There needs to be a lot less trying to change the page as it sits at the moment, and a lot more discussion towards what the stable version of this content- if it goes in at all- is going to look like" and "This was an edit war over a BLP. Controversial material always stays out of a BLP when it is disputed . . . you discuss and then re-add the material when you have consensus, you do not get into a revert war". So there's been zero discussion by Mr.Grantevans2 over the points I raised, only repeated forum shopping complete with baseless attacks on other editors. Unprotecting will only cause Mr.Grantevans2 to add material removed as BLP violations against consensus, and since I and doubtless other editors will be online less over Christmas (the protection is due to expire on Christmas Day) I suggest the protection is extended until the dispute is resolved, which won't be soon judging by the lack of discussion. 2 lines of K303 13:03, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined. The article is fully protected until Dec 25. The best thing would be to use that time to seek agreement on the talk page. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 13:06, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    It will be difficult for me to engage in discussion with 303 until he explains why there is a picture of a snort quantity of cocaine on his talk page and a (albeit humourous attempt,perhaps) photo referencing execution of British Members of Parliament on his User page.Mr.Grantevans2 (talk) 14:22, 22 December 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.

    Fulfilled/denied requests

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

    Temporary full protection dispute, Single purpose account continues to re-add content which isn't supported by the sources or are plain opinion pieces. Editor uses the talk page but not to talk about the problems with the sources and re-adds the content anyway. WP:BLP could also apply with the re-addition of the content. Bidgee (talk) 00:46, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    This is a content dispute, and there is no requirement for full protection. User:Cecilex has attempted to use the talk page extensivly, but has instead been subject to continuous reversion, and has commented on the talk page "I will remove any citation you find to be invalid." The person is trying very hard to follow the rules, against unrepentantly stubborn editting. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 01:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    So your solution is to block one edit warrior while letting the other go? Why? There is no right and wrong in an edit war, as I'm sure you are aware. Discussing at the same time does not excuse the edit warring. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Please_review_a_block_I_am_about_to_make and User_talk:Cecilex. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 02:21, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    . Dabomb87 (talk) 04:51, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    User(s) blocked. — Cecilex (talk · contribs); page itself Already protected. by another admin --slakr\ talk / 06:43, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=403732691"