Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2601:1c0:4901:2191:d8f5:6a49:464c:20b5 (talk) at 23:13, 18 April 2016 (→Mark Gormley). 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 increase in protection level

    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.

    Mawlid

    Temporary full-protection: Persistent edit warring - editor continously restoring the article to their preferred version with little talk page activity. Protect page to encourage discussion. 31.49.133.154 (talk) 18:02, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Two users involved. Warned and will monitor the situation — MusikAnimal talk 18:17, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Generation Z

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Page is currently pending-changes protected after problems with an IP-hopping 2606:6000:* editor (see this ANI), but really needs to be semi'd. The problem isn't the introduction of bad IP content that needs checking first, it's one IP-hopping user WP:OWNingly reverting anything that they don't 100% agree with. McGeddon (talk) 18:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Pinging Widr — MusikAnimal talk 18:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Their reverts won't become visible, though, unless someone accepts them. Widr (talk) 18:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Widr:But if someone rejects the edit, the IP will revert it "back" (and this has just happened). From the perspective of the editors patrolling the page, it's the same old edit warring.
    (Is there a more constructive way to handle this than by protecting the article? If this user had a registered account, they'd have been forced to change their edit warring instincts or get blocked, by now - but as a hopping IP they can just rack up another ANI discussion or warning for edit warring and switch to a new IP the next day without even having to blank their talk page. It looks like they may have joined briefly as User:Wwwma the last time that Generation Z got semi-protected, but faded back to multiple IPs.) --McGeddon (talk) 19:18, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for 2 weeks now. Widr (talk) 19:27, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Nicolás Maduro

    Semi-protection: article has been vandalized almost twenty times in 2016 by various unregistered users—article is for a living politician and current head of state. --Akhenaten0 (talk) 19:59, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Widr (talk) 20:01, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm new at this—I don't think I was clear. There have been a long series of vandalism edits from various and seemingly unconnected IP addresses, none of which are logged in accounts. I can't start arbitration if the users haven't created accounts, right? --Akhenaten0 (talk) 20:10, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Tahalka

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – constant vandalism from 182 series ip. - Managerarc™ talk 20:32, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Al-Bireh

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-vandalism of article under WP:ARBPIA3#500/30. Huldra (talk) 20:47, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    List of traditional children's games

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Globe Trekker (talk) 21:05, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. — MusikAnimal talk 21:30, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Tom Sayers

    Full protection: Edit warring, with no compromise in sight. The present version of the page shows unacceptable bias. Iain07 (talk) 21:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    John C. Heenan

    Full protection: Edit warring, with no compromise in sight. The present version of the page shows unacceptable bias. This article and the Sayers article (above) are closely related. The two must agree. Iain07 (talk) 21:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Module:Sports table

    Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template – Given that this module for creating sports table has now gained widespread use over several different sports, I think it would be good to have it protected as well as submodules. At least indef semi-protection. It involves main articles and submodules Module:Sports table/WDL, Module:Sports table/WL, Module:Sports table/WL OT, Module:Sports table/WL OTL tiebreak and Module:Sports table/sub. Qed237 (talk) 21:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    MasterbeastHD

    Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Wgolf (talk) 21:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Culture of Yemen

    Indefinite pending changes: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Different IPs adding controversial information and edit-warring. Laber□T 22:10, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Andy Halliday

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. 2601:1C0:4901:2191:D8F5:6A49:464C:20B5 (talk) 23:13, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    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.

    List of social networking websites

    Indefinite semi-protection: There's no reason why an article should be indefinitely fully protected. If it must be protected indefinitely, then either semi, 30/500, or PC2. —cyberpowerChat:Limited Access 18:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Paging Kudpung. Kudpung to aisle 3. Katietalk 20:47, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @KrakatoaKatie:. If Cyberpower678 is prepared to find time to watch the article round the clock and be sure to remove the constant stream unwanted additions to it, then I have no objection to it being unprotected. Perhaps a review of its history and talkk page archives will help to understand the situation. . Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:41, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Glancing over it, it would seem the biggest problem is that people keep adding non-notable/unsourced social networking sites. Looking closer at edit requests, those that get approved, are experienced editors, while those that don't, are new/anon editors. I would say 30/500 protection is sufficient for not having to deal with reviewing edits, and that PC2 is sufficient if we want to enable reviewing edits.—cyberpowerChat:Online 01:51, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, we can do neither of those for this article as it stands now. The options are you watch it and revert the disruptive edits, or we leave it as is. Up to you. Katietalk 01:58, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Wasn't PC2 approved for use at some point? I occasionally see my bot tagging articles with the PC2 tag.—cyberpowerChat:Limited Access 03:38, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    It's enabled technically, but there's no consensus how to use it. There's a newish RFC about it that's not drawing any interest but I think that's because nobody knows about it. Katietalk 16:56, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I would pefer 30/500 protection instead of other protections, I currently can't edit on 30/500 because of a low edit count. KGirlTrucker87 (talk) 01:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    So why can't we use 30/500 protection? It seems like the perfect protection level to keep this article in check.—cyberpowerChat:Offline 05:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Because the policy, which was decided by an RfC, states that 30/500 ay only be used in topic areas authorised by ArbCom or the community. So far the community has not made any authorisations, and AFAIK social networks are not under any ArbCom sanctions. BethNaught (talk) 14:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah right. Since the community has the power to authorize this restriction, I'll raise it over at AN.—cyberpowerChat:Online 14:53, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Discussion started here.—cyberpowerChat:Online 15:03, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Seeing as the discussion has moved to a new venue, should this just be procedurally be declined? tutterMouse (talk) 15:30, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined (procedural) Katietalk 16:07, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests
    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.

    Handled requests

    A rolling archive of the last seven days of protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Rolling archive.

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=715952129"