Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 208.125.67.1 (talk) at 23:14, 6 July 2012 (formal request). 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 - This player is currently the subject of a potential transfer to Queens Park Rangers F.C., but this transfer is not complete. I suggest semi-protection until at least Monday to stop people jumping the gun. – PeeJay 23:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Currently being targeted by Nangparbat . Darkness Shines (talk) 23:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent removal of content. GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 21:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC) [reply]

    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Talk it out. Drmies (talk) 21:51, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection Peresistant IP Vandalization (i.e. changing his name to "mahamadou wauge", also noted that the IP is from a Communacations Company in Seoul, South Korea. Calgaryivan (talk) 21:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. That's five days ago, and it is not clear that it counts as vandalism. See WP:VANDAL. Also, don't expect an admin to block if you haven't even given the editor a warning. Drmies (talk) 21:33, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Frequent updates to this NBA basketball player's article based on anonymous, unofficial sources based on trade news like this. No deals can be made until July 11 due to July moratorium. —Bagumba (talk) 20:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 21:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection Persistent vandalism relating to the Newco Rangers situation. James Morrison (talk) 20:10, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 21:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection: High level of persistent IP vandalism. LindseyW827 (talk) 19:51, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Drmies (talk) 21:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 18:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 21:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 18:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Not enough, IMO, and recent vandal was indef-blocked. Drmies (talk) 21:41, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Reverting of the same poster always. Plea$ant 1623 17:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) Semi-protection wouldn't make sense, as it doesn't have any effect on autoconfirmed users. Full- or upload-protection needed. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 18:02, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I have given user:Metroid100 a final warning on his talk page. He has reverted this poster eighteen times since April, and eight times in the last few days. Any more reversions, and he will be blocked. I will watch. Please try to communicate with one another using talk pages in the future rather than just with edit summaries; I can find no evidence of discussion of which poster to use. Communicating only via edit summaries just about always leads to edit wars. Thanks. -- Dianna (talk) 19:33, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Already protected. by J Milburn. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of recent IP vandalism and POV pushing. Michaelmas1957 17:06, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Sorry, I see only one active recent IP vandal and they're blocked for a year. Drmies (talk) 21:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Someone is doing Sneaky vandalism on The Raccoons article, by minor alteration of facts and saying reverting of his vandalism is vandalism, from multiple IP addresses. Last IP's used by this person are 75.0.238.209,75.0.234.228, 75.16.97.149, and 75.9.220.255. Also, I would like to request Temporary semi-protection for List of The Raccoons characters do to the same IP vandal. Powergate92Talk 16:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected ...but for edit-warring, not for vandalism, mind you. Drmies (talk) 21:50, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Repeated speculation. Hammer1980·talk 16:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 21:42, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Pre RfC. Requesting 36 hour protection. —cyberpower ChatOnline 15:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC) [reply]

    Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 21:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: IPs persistently adding unsourced content, primarily about episodes that have yet to air. AussieLegend (talk) 15:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Recurring promotion of a Vietnamese blog by IP. --Langus (t) 15:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Cresix (talk) 15:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Already done by EdJohnston. Drmies (talk) 21:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Lots of unsunstantiated rumour. Will settle down once player moves clubs. Hammer1980·talk 11:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 21:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The page is again vandalized after a month of peace. SMS Talk 14:16, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: I have left a final warning to the main editor causing the disruption and will block if it continues. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 22:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism from bored fans of MS Paint Adventures.—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:37, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely, after many escalating protection periods up to 1 year in duration have failed to cause the disruptive editors to go elsewhere when protection expires. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:33, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – (See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sanjayp3) This article has been under constant vandalizing and disruption by variousIPs since the article was created (it is strongly suspected that these IPs are the creator of the article logged off). The IPs keep changing, so blocks are not helpful. Given the history of the article, the fact that the AfD is headed one way, etc., I am requesting an indefinite protection. Singularity42 (talk) 10:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for two weeks. Dianna (talk) 16:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by IP. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 10:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected one week. Alexf(talk) 16:49, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary Semi-protection: Too much vandalism either by newly created a/c or IPs. Please semi-protect these article at least 1 month. Article is related to new discovery of Higgs boson.--♥ Kkm010 ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 05:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected one week. Alexf(talk) 16:47, 6 July 2012 (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: This article has been "indefinitely" semi-protected beyond any reasonable length of time (2 years or more), especially since it is not subject to vandalism and has not been vandalized since late 2008/early 2009 (following the death of the subject). Before Pinter's death (24 Dec. 2008), the article was adequately protected by and subject to WP:BLP and had very few problems, which were easily corrected by the Wikipedia community. Since the subject's death, a small group of users, most often led by Jezhotwells and a few others engaging in protecting this article, have participated in censorship of the article, despite others' suggestions or edits being fully in keeping with WP:POL. These few involved users have orchestrated the blocking and/or even the banning of other users with whom they have differed (sometimes surreptitiously coordinating such attacks off-Wiki, resulting in their getting a relatively new administrator to ban the primary contributor to the content and documentation of the article, even though there was not a majority of uninvolved users "voting" for such an action. This matter needs thorough investigation by an Oversight committee. Any such investigation needs to begin with the earliest versions of the article and its talk pages and follow the process from the creation of the article to its current version via its editing history, consulting various peer and other reviews, including its featured article review, which resulted in crucial documented information and correct documentation becoming erroneously deleted and replaced with errors. Some edits to versions of both the article and its talk pages pointing to these errors have been deleted even from the editing history by some users with "roll back" or other privileges. These deletions to the editing history need to be restored so that the actual editing history can be reconstructed and followed chronologically. Furthermore, it does no good for a user to list these errors separately (if anyone had such time to do so) on the talk page and to ask for corrections to be made, because Jezhotwells claims (erroneously in some cases; see archive 8 and/or the editing history of the current talk page) that he has already corrected them, removes the requests from the history, and thus ignores the errors that he himself and others have introduced over the years since 2008. For such reasons, the article is no longer fully reliable, and it will not be fully reliable unless these few users' hold over the article is broken or relinquished, and it is once again unprotected and thus open to editing by all. Thank you. --208.125.67.1 (talk) 23:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection: Suitable afc submission waiting. Mdann52 (talk) 18:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection: User has submitted a suitable WP:AFC submission for creation. Mdann52 (talk) 16:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) Link to AfC submission: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ken Sibanda. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 13:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: as a previous version was deleted after a messy AfD, see WP:Articles for deletion/Ken Sibanda, I think the closing/salting admin, Fluffernutter (talk) should be consulted to see whether s/he is happy with this or would prefer it to go to DRV. JohnCD (talk) 19:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I have notified Fluffernutter. JohnCD (talk) 22:51, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    (Non-administrator comment)That submission is not acceptable, at least yet. It's poorly written and has IMDB references, as well as press releases, a wordpress blog etc. OohBunnies! (talk) 23:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    While it looks Mziboy has done some good work improving what he had previously, there are still serious sourcing issues with the draft article, including dead links, unreliable sources, and the use of sources that don't support assertions they're being used to reference. While the facts of Sibanda's existence and work don't seem to be in doubt, the draft version provides extremely dubious support for assertions of notability, sought-after-ness, etc due to the misuse of sources. I'm not comfortable unprotecting the page at this time due to these problems. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 23:11, 6 July 2012 (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

    Temporary semi-protect Ongoing IP vandalism from several sources. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:45, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Elockid (Talk) 12:49, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: IP editors, who never use the talk page, regularly change the positions and "ranks" of the various members. We need to remain what is stated on the official site, and that seems to mean we need to lock out non-confirmed editors. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Elockid (Talk) 13:22, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Infinite full protection: Redirect should be left in peace; especially since there are still ignorant people undoing others' actions despite there being consensus per deletion discussion. Thanks, CyanGardevoir (used EDIT!) 06:17, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected. Elockid (Talk) 13:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Ognjen Ožegović (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

    Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – When I made my original request for this talk page's main article page to be indefinitely protected I forgot to add the talk page also which is similiarly being recreated. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 05:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. Don't think it's really necessary for now. The create protection on the article should suffice. Elockid (Talk) 13:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – The article is persistently targeted by IP-editors and users with one or very few edits, who are very likely sockpuppets. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 04:58, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Elockid (Talk) 13:04, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Casprings (talk) 02:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. Not seeing much in the way of vandalism. Elockid (Talk) 12:57, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection Persistent IP disruption. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:41, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. How bout a year first? Elockid (Talk) 12:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and incorrect info added by IPs. Trivialist (talk) 01:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Also, User(s) blocked.. Elockid (Talk) 13:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and incorrect info added by IPs. Trivialist (talk) 01:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked.. Elockid (Talk) 13:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection: Edit war. The article is a GA one. I suggest full protection until the issues are solved.--Jetstreamer Talk 00:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined for now. Agree with the above. Elockid (Talk) 12:53, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism from many IPs. Has been protected many times previously. David1217 What I've done 00:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Elockid (Talk) 12:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: I just noticed recently, there were unsourced edits & other related information by IP editors and certain users with incorrect and misleading information that I have been continually monitoring and warring against daily with this being a recent disturbance after a long period of quiet little to no activity. As far as my knowledge goes, edits have been altered back and forth as edits of unsourced information every few days, such as the terminology of the vocal positions that the members have occupied in the members section on the article. In fact, this is always this reoccurring conflict when uncited sources have not been confirmed with this dispute of information between the vocal positions especially. Moreover, it is the same issue that manifests itself occasionally as seen a few months earlier on TVXQ’s article page, JYJ’s associated act. Requesting semi-protection for a week or so to see if that stops them for now.ClaudelleLe (talk) 21:10, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Elockid (Talk) 12:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: It was semiprotected for a year on 3 July 2011, and vandalised again on 5 July 2012 (including self-reverted BLP of "xxx yyy is a poo"). I think it's on a school syllabus, so attracts a lot of young readers. PamD 13:57, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: I've put it in my watchlist for now. Elockid (Talk) 15:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected indefinitely. Elockid (Talk) 13:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. 2011wp (talk) 08:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected by User:Bongwarrior.--MakecatTalk 08:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Already protected. (for the script) Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 08:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=501022593"