Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 81.157.83.44 (talk) at 21:13, 12 October 2006 (→‎{{La|Paradise Lost (band)}}). 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.

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

    Semi-protection. The page is continually being vandalized with the same hostile POV text. PacificBoy 20:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]





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

    Request semi-protection due to the fact that the article has received numerous vandalous attacks from anonymous IP users within the past few days. Thank you. Rarelibra 19:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

    Paradise Lost (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Request semi-protection for all of the above, because an ArbCom banned user (User:Leyasu)continues to remove or change things in the articles using a range of IP's and "cold" names; It is not a dispute as how it might appear - editor was notorious for using Wikipedia as a battleground and flinging personal attacks towards others and has been defiant to almost all admins who have intervened. --Danteferno 18:49, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Danteferno also went through Arbcom and was barred from the same batch of articles, including the above. He has also been banned several times for revert parole violation, and has recently been warned for accusing people of being sockpuppets as an excuse to violate that parole. Admins as well have also endorsed the version of the page which Danteferno keeps changing, having told him to leave it until he can provide sources counter to those in the articles he has asked for protection for. It was due to this defiance himself that he was banned from these articles.

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

    Request semi-protection because of constant vandalism & unproductive edits, mostly by users without accounts. Spylab 18:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. -- Steel 18:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Request semi-protection because of constant vandalism & unproductive edits, mostly by users without accounts. Spylab 18:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. Level of vandalism not that high. Some good faith edits. -- Steel 18:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Request semi-protection because of constant vandalism & unproductive edits, mostly by users without accounts. Spylab 18:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- -- Steel 18:15, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Request semi-protection because of constant vandalism & unproductive edits, mostly by users without accounts. Spylab 18:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. No real need at this time. -- Steel 18:15, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    List of ska musicians (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Request semi-protection because of constant additions of non-notable ska-punk bands, mostly by users without accounts. Spylab 18:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- Steel 18:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Request semi-protection because of a history of vandalism & unproductive edits, mostly by users without accounts. I would have posted this request a long time ago, if I knew how to do soSpylab

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- Steel 18:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Request semi-protection because of a history of vandalism & unproductive edits, mostly by users without accounts. I would have posted this request a long time ago, if I knew how to do soSpylab

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- Steel 18:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection: Repeat vandalism and flagrat copyvio edits by multiple anon ip's (I suspect it is the same user using multiple computers or the same computer & recycling ips).Hkelkar 17:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected -- Steel 17:45, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Color Climax Corporation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Can I get a semi-protect on this one? I'm tired of reverting the same linkspam (over a dozen times now) from a variable IP anon who has not responded in any way to any queries or warnings. Fan-1967 17:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected -- Steel 17:47, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Request full protection, for cool off period. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 17:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected due to edit warring. -- Steel 17:51, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Parma, Ohio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection against continuing spam from anon IPs. -- Mycroft.Holmes 17:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected due to edit warring. -- Steel 17:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection more vandalism from anon IPs. --CFIF ☎ ⋐ 16:55, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined linked to from Main Page, lots of good faith edits going on. -- Steel 17:58, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Annan Plan for Cyprus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Requesting full protection. Article was tagged as "Disputable" by me. Tekleni reverts article 3 times per day.(not more). Mustafa Akalp 16:30, 11 October 2006 (UTC)---Sorry, for placing wrongly first time . Mustafa Akalp 16:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Mustafa also reverts three times per day (not more) and has not touched the talkpage. You can't just tag an entire article on a whim... especially when everyone else finds it fully accurate and neutral. Protection is not what is required here; what is required is Mustafa to actually discuss his ideas (whatever they may be), and not try to impose them by means of edit warring and tag every article he just doesn't fancy.--Tekleni 16:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Fully protected due to edit warring. -- Steel 18:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesús Gabaldón (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Semi-protection. See below.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 15:11, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. No-one's blanked the page since yesterday, and I'd rather keep it open to allow everyone to participate. -- Steel 18:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection. Ever since I nominated this article for deletion, a relentless anonymous user has been blanking the page, as well as its AfD page (not to mention my user and talk pages, which do not need to be protected). The user edits under a variety of IP addresses and will not desist, despite repeated warnings and admin blocks.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 15:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected -- Steel 18:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Manchester United F.C. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Anonymous vandals are making lame POV-pushing attempts, such as "MAN U IS THE BEST CLUB EVER!", on this article. The situation is so bad that within three minutes of my first reversion of such edits, two more POV edits from different IPs showed up. I have already made used up my reverts in less than two hours. Please semi-protect the article, or things will soon get out of control. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:48, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Alphachimp 17:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Power Rangers: Operation Overdrive (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection; this article is hit at least once daily with a blanking of some sections and replacing with an extremely unconfirmed cast table. Only one user who has done this is registered and has an old enough account, so it will be fairly easy to deal with him, as opposed to the IPs that myself and Arrow deal with more often. Ryūlóng 03:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. Level of vandalism not that high, seems to be some good faith edits. -- Steel 18:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    • semi-protection Flavor_Flav (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Muppetmower1989, TeslaDeathRay, 67.165.164.80 and 72.132.230.219 are all members of a Counter-Strike Clan and they continue to vandalize the Flavor Flav page with pointless stats and info about their clan "Team Flav". All resquests to discuss on the Flavor Flave talkpage are ignored and a revert war has begun. I know semi-protection will not stop the vandalism, but it will at least stop them from doing anonymous edits while a resolution can be worked out.Gamer83 02:41, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Alphachimp 17:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    October 11, 2006 New York City plane crash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Page is being very badly vandalized by multiple IPs; oftentimes reverts fail because another vandal has edited in the time between clicking "edit" and "save". Requesting semi-protection. —Brent Dax 22:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Oppose per WP:PPol (linked from mainpage). WinHunter (talk) 23:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Edit war over "is he/isn't he dead", full protection. Will (Glaciers melting in the dead of night) 21:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC) Please fully protect based on my edit. I confirmed his death at the MLB official website. Kraken of the Depths 21:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I agree that it should be fully protected. Not for the fact that people editing over the "is he/isn't he" stuff, but that people are using the article as a blog...people are editing the article with each "breaking news" item using present tense such as "ESPN is now claiming..." or "The mayor of NYC is on TV now saying..."--Kester Teague 22:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't do a full protection, as I was involved in the edit war, which quite a few users broke 3rr, I only listed one in the 3rr page, but it calmed down now with his death confirmed so I don't think it's needed. Jaranda wat's sup 22:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    While I think two things were going on, the more important issue is that of adding trivial details about various press conferences. Which you weren't doing, others were. I don't think that adding comments that the mayor made in some press conference moments after the news broke gives the article a professional tone at all. These are details that will be forgotten soon, if they aren't already.--Kester Teague 23:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined per the duplicate request above. -- Steel 18:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Internet slang phrases (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    I'd like to see this page semi-protected. For around four months I've kept my eye on it. Splash undertook a major cleanup of the article and I've been keeping it tidy since then, but the effort required to maintain it and verifiable information on it would be greatly alleviated if it were semi-protected, since it is a huge and constant target for the addition of nonsense and unsourced claims. --Kuzaar-T-C- 19:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. -- Steel 18:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Pierre Martin Ngô Đình Thục (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Please re-protect this article, as the same vandalist is at it again, under different IP addresses. He continues his vandalisations of the article, and has lied frequently, posing as at least five different persons, while writing the same (and using the same writing style with three dots after each line : ....). He is a fraud and tries to impose his lies upon the article. I beg you for protection, as I do not have the time to reverty and conserve constantly!Smith2006 18:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. Page only recently unprotected, level of vandalism not that high. Request again if it continues. -- Steel 18:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    User:Afrika paprika is banned for incivility/personal attacks, 3RR and edit-warring altogether. He constantly keeps returning as 89.172.229.140, traditionally reverting under annonymous ip addresses starting with 89.172. There is no need for checkuser confirmation, as the user self-identified as Afrika paprika at the bottom of Talk:Pagania. I request semi-protection of Pagania, Travunia, Zahumlje and Doclea; because he is simply abusing the block and ignoring Wikipedia's rules. I am reporting him at the Incidents for prolonging his block-time (which has already been prolongued once, I think). --PaxEquilibrium 18:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection requested. Because of the subject matter, it is a constant target for vandalism by anon users as well as people who register and immediately commit vandalism. Dgies 18:27, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Alphachimp 17:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection requested. Anonymous editors are adding cities they like once or twice a day to a list that is compiled by the Globalization and World Cities Study Group and Network (GaWC). Sometimes the vandal edit is not noticed by other wikipedians, which results in false GaWC lists that stay on the article for weeks. Maartenvdbent 17:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Request semi-protection for Brian Quintana and Pedro Zamora. Persistent new anon IPs being used by probably the same person(s) to make the same vandalising reverts many times in recent history. --Geniac 14:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Various terms used for Germans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    I would like to request Full Protection on this page. Recently a notorious German nationalist editor (User:Ulritz) has begon a crusade against me and my edits. Since he does not respond to edit summaries in a civil and constructive way nor does he make use of talk pages I would like to ask an admin to revert the article to the pre-dispute phase (this one) to force User:Ulritz to discuss his edits or to drop his revisonism of German warcrimes. The article is rarely edited so I do not think it will cause much trouble. Thanks in advance. Rex 13:49, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-Protection:New and anon users (I suspect are the same person) have been blanking the entire article and replacing it with copyvios from extremist websites. See article history for issues declared be several users and an admin.Hkelkar 00:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Full Protection: The article on "Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale" has been having almost nothing but opinions written on the matter, with little or no evidence. So I, as a new member of Wikipedia, have replaced this narrow minded article that has been on here for so long, with a part of an essay that has more sources in it for information regarding the man and the issue behind him, than any referenced by others editing the article before. The website from which I have excerpted this Essay from is the following: Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale. And I am presuming this is the same website "Hkelkar" and others have regarded as being Extremist Website, which I would like to say is a very false statement. I would like to mention, for those who do not know, The Sikh Coalition is an unbiased and organized resource for Sikhs facing the problems of today's post-9/11 world. Here is a link to the Sikh Coalition's homepage, it will tell you all about their mission and their goals: Sikh Coalition. Also I would encourage the Administrators to read the Essay I have provided from that website, and decide for yourselves if it is an "extremist article" or not, because in my opinion it is the least biased article which I have found on this man "Sant Jarnail Singh," and is one that is not filled with mainly extremely malicious or appraising opinions, but one with many facts and verifiable sources. Singh27

    He should read the clause on partisan sources on WP:RS before demanding fp. I suggest that the less controversial version be reverted to before any action, sprotect or fprotect, be taken.Hkelkar 01:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I did read the WP:RS, and I provided the source from which I excerpted the Essay, I do no see then how I am violating the copyright because I am not claiming the work as my own. Also, the "less controversial version" that is being talked about by Hkelkar is an article, that has basically close to no valuable sources or verfiable facts at all within the article, and to encourage the posting of such articles is to encourage bigotry. The Essay I have provided, in itself, has a large quantity of references and verifiable sources, that its content of facts cannot be refuted. I request the Adminstrators to either delete the entire article itself, or demand the editors to provide verifiable sources which are least biased, which I believe my source is. Before taking any action, I highly encourage the Administrators to atleast read the Essay I have provided, and then look at the current article that has been posted on Wikipedia regarding "Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale." After that whichever action you take, I fully respect, but please atleast look at the source, which I have provided: Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale Singh27 23:33, 10 October 2006
    BBC is bigotry? An academic source is bigotry? I really do not know how to respond to this.Hkelkar 05:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I read the so called "academic source" you gave, and I have to say, if you consider that article to be academic, I guess we could consider "Archie's" Comic to be an academic article as well. In that article, the man does not but talk of his own opinion on the matter, and of the ONLY 7 sources which he provides, he references HIMSELF for 3 out of those 7. You call that academic? If you want an academically written Essay and source, the one I have provided is much better, for it has an exhaustive list of sources. Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale
    Also, you referenced "BBC." What happened to reports by Mary Ann Weaver, where she states "'The pattern in each village appears to be the same. The Army moves in during the early evening, cordons a village, and announces over loudspeakers that everyone must come out. All males between the ages of 15 and 35 are trussed and blindfolded, then taken away. Thousands have disappeared in the Punjab since the Army operation began. The Government has provided no lists of names; families don't know if sons and husbands are arrested, underground, or dead.'
    I thought the Article was supposed to be "Neutral". Why then are you contradicting yourself and not providing material on both sides of the issue? Or for that matter, material that is not biased on one side or the other, and in your case, why are you only providing material that is putting Bhindranwale in a villaneous light. That is just as wrong as glorifying the man, since this is an encyclopedia, and is supposed to be neutral. Maybe you should read the WP:NPOV yourself Hkelkar?
    I suggest to the Administrators, some strong action needs to be taken on this Article, because too many people are posting only opinions on the Man, either glorifying or malicious, and there has been no neutral point of view. And the only source so far that has been provided that is closest to neutral has been the following website: Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale. So please either entirely delete this article, or force some changes on the article so that it may be unbiased. Singh27 20:00, 11 October 2006

    The Game (rapper) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Requestion semi-protection as this article is consistently vandalised by fans of this performer who seek to inflate his success and persistently add POV, unsourced language into the article space.Ramsquire 19:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Plus there is constant vadalism which includes blanking and ridiculuos edits like this one which was made by a user who registered for an account today, and this made by an anonymous user today. --Ted87 00:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Already protected. by another admin. -- Steel 19:45, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Organised persecution of ethnic Germans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)


    Requesting temporary protection due to long standing edit war. Thor Templin 15:48, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

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

    Requesting permanent full protection. This was my former username, I had it switched due to a number of conflicts including people find out my personal information, for some reason, despite the redirect, people keep on posting there, I'd appreciate if it could be protected so that they post on my real page instead. -- Chabuk 15:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Requesting semi-protection due to vandalism and people using it as a soapbox--S downing 15:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- Steel 19:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Requesting semi-protection due to an edit war - an anon user keeps adding in unsubstantiated claims. -- DiegoTehMexican 15:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Voice-of-All 04:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    File:Stop hand.svg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Very high risk image used in various warning templates, e.g. {{subst:spam4im}} and {{subst:test4}}. Full protection requested. MER-C 03:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    That image is hosted on Wikimedia Commons, which I'm pretty sure precludes localwiki protection (Hence things like uploaded mainpage images from Commons to protect them here). 68.39.174.238 04:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    That's exactly what I was suggesting. MER-C 07:49, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Done.Voice-of-All 04:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Page protected[1] by Voice-of-All. (I'm only putting this here to convince the bot to archive it.) Alphachimp 18:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    G-Unit Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protection Ips and new users are spamming and vandalizing the article in the history link here. Also user have placed internal links all over the article, alongside the ever so annoying crystal ball (predictions of album release dates), and editing errors in proper names such as: 50, not 50 Cent. Please check back if the article is revert back to the previous version you see in the link located here. Here what I have done to the article currently here. Please can there be something done to inform all users that this spamming,over usage of fan sites and crystal ball is not a part of Wikipedia. Edit war with Lmz00 is looming again. Thanks LILVOKA 16:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. Voice-of-All 03:47, 12 October 2006 (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.

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

    The tendentious editor User:Muggle1982 who had been repeatedly vandalizing the article has disappeared and his sock puppet has been indefblocked.Perhaps now is a good time to unprotect or semi-protect the article so that the well-sourced edits he vandalized may be re-inserted.As it stands, the article is barely a stub.Hkelkar 15:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    I would like to clean up (read: shrink/delete) some of the less-notable information on this article, but it is currently protected. Thank you. --NE2 09:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    I was jsut wondering where this information came from. I just watched a documentary which was backed up with facts and it seems to me that ALexander the Great was indeed Albanian not Greek like most people may think. Thank you.

    Greater and Lesser Tunbs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    This was protected although there was already a good compromise in the building [2]. Now we've all cooled off and there has been no quarreling on the talkpage for a few days. I would like to do some expansion of the article on the basis of that compromise. I think there will be no editwar this time. The admin who protected it has not been active since, otherwise I'd have asked him. FellFairy 08:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I requested the protection of that page a few days ago and I think the protection is still needed. There are still unresolved issues on talk page, and User:FellFairy was a party to the edit war. Considering all that, I believe unprotecting the page will lead to another round of edit waring. --Mardavich 11:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Anarcho-capitalism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Previously, this unprotection was denied. Note that Anarcho-capitalism is and was a Wikipedia:Featured article before User:WGee and User:AaronS came along and tried their "luck" with the article. I think unprotection is warranted, the problem is not with Anarcho-capitalism article, but with the Anarchism and anarcho-capitalism article. That just one user can come along and try to trash a featured article is not enough for (continuing) page protection. Intangible 23:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Guitar Hero II (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    This article was protected to prevent the addition of relevant information regarding the fact that Non-Red Octane wireless guitars do not work with the game. This is published information in that the current Guitar Hero II demo is publicly available and the wireless guitars that do not work are available to the public. The information that Red Octane was releasing their own wireless guitar was properly attributed by linking to one of many retail pages where it is for sale as a preorder pending the November 7, 2006 release. Please restore the useful information and unlock the page. Gamesgenie 04:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    This page was locked after edits began to be made that were correcting the flagrantly POV character of the article. Cberlet entered into the discussion, and has consistently refused to discuss issues brought up, and has instead resorted to serial violations of code of conduct, bullying, name calling, baiting other editors (for which he has been reprimanded). This page was protected at a time when the credibility of his sources and his own POV claims were brought into the discussion. BabyDweezil 04:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Teachings of Falun Gong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    I left this note on the discussion page: "This is actually the version that does not conform to wikipedia, and which violates wikipedia policies of at least NPOV and no original research. The page should be locked on the version which does not violate wikipedia policies. If you are reading this and can rectify this situation, please do so.--Asdfg12345 16:53, 6 October 2006 (UTC)" I originally requested a protection for this reason: there are two sections which have been arbitrarily inserted in the middle of the article, which are already covered by the article, which violate wikipedia policies, and which belong on someone's personal blog. Just take a look and I think you will see what I mean. You may compare them with the sections that explain those subjects and which do not violate wikipedia policies. The page should be protected on the other version.--Asdfg12345 15:31 07 de octubre de 2006

    There is nothing obvious enough for me to revert over per m:the wrong version.Voice-of-All 03:51, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Test5-n (edit | [[Talk:Template:Test5-n|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Would you mind just unprotecting for a short period this just to allow me to do some tidying to the template, to bring it in line with the other. See here or here for others I've done. On the WP:UTM page, the warnings were showing the table that was around it. Would like to have access to them all for a short while just to perform housekeeping on them if possible, and bring them all as a standard. Cheers muchly Khukri (talk . contribs) 08:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Make the revisions on a user subpage and post back here, we need specific changes.Voice-of-All 03:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    OK done, if you scroll down to test5-n on here WP:UTM example and compare it to the others it's not the same format etc. What I'd like to do can be seen Here, but because it in my subpage can't be displayed as a template. I'd also, if you'll let me, like to standardise spam4im, drmafd4 and all of the sharedIP page headers....... to start with. Cheers Khukri (talk . contribs) 10:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Done.Voice-of-All 14:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for significant 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.

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

    Please change this to a protected redirect to YTMND. I would have used {{editprotected}} but the talk page was protected as well. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 01:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    The page history shows that such a redirect was disputed.Voice-of-All 03:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    Fulfilled/denied requests

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

    Request semi-protection after a series of vandalisms after it was unprotected. This page was just coincidentally protected by Can't sleep, clown will eat me Valoem talk 23:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Page protected[3] by User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me. Alphachimp 01:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


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

    Semi-protection requested. Tons of anonymous vandals are attacking this article. To give you an idea of how bad the situation is: Two anonymous vandals with different IPs attacked the article in less than a minute. Just after I reverted them, I discovered that yet another anonymous vandal had attacked the article! --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:37, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Page protected [4] by Steel359. Srikeit (Talk | Email) 14:55, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    Napoleon I of France (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Unfortunately, this article has been vandalized repeatedly since protection was lifted on October 9th.—Barbatus 14:32, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Also, I have blocked one of the article's most persistent vandals for a month. RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 16:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    This community banned user's talk page should have {{Banned user}} on it instead of {{Indefblockeduser}} on it, because it will get deleted if this is not done. Jesse Viviano 04:30, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Changed Thanks. Alphachimp 06:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    permanent protection Inappropriate edits and changes to site. Had to previously remove entire article. Matt Slate

    There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. For now, be sure to use descriptive edit summaries and discuss edits on talk. Alphachimp 04:57, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection due to persistant anonymous vandalism from different IPs during the last year.--Ioannes Pragensis 07:45, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Srikeit (Talk | Email) 09:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection due to persistant vanalism today, probably only needs a day or so to cool off (tonight was fight night) - thanks SKELETOR666 05:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Alphachimp 05:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection due to persistant vanalism today, as above - tonight was fight night. - thanks SKELETOR666 05:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Alphachimp 05:04, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Psychonaut/Contributions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Semi-protection due to persistent vandalism to this article and its talk page. Please protect both the article and the talk page. —Psychonaut 04:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. I didn't do the talk page since there isn't one. Hope this helps. Antandrus (talk) 04:32, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Psychonaut/Images (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Semi-protection due to persistent vandalism. —Psychonaut 04:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. Hope this helps. Antandrus (talk) 04:32, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Thousand Island Park (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Full protection - This article is currently semi-protected, but that doesn't prevent Rsm18 (talk · contribs) from reverting this article from a stub to a vanity page. Please revert back to the stub version and up the protection level to full. 128.2.251.175 04:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection:Anon users vandalize, get warned, then change IP addresses and vandalize again. --Lethargy 02:10, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Alphachimp 04:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


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

    Repeated vandalism from random IPs. Kat, Queen of Typos 22:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Alphachimp 05:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    My Chemical Romance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection due to anon-ip vandalism. ~crazytales56297 O rly? 19:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Alphachimp 04:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Camden School for Girls (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection Multiple anonymous IPs adding nonsense additions for past several days. -- Gogo Dodo 19:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Alphachimp 05:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    The article has been repeatedly vandalized since the removal of protection at noon of the 8th of this month.—Barbatus 19:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Page protected[5] by Centrx. Alphachimp 04:53, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Request for semi-protection, in the light of the recent nuclear testing, there have been lots of vandalism (nearly 40 since 7 AM today) but very difficult to count the number, since there were lots of them.JForget 19:13, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 00:07, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Un-protected per WP:PPol (linked from main page). WinHunter (talk) 07:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Muhammad bin Qasim (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Request for semi-protection, This article is being extensively modified and info not related to this page has been added. The reversion to October 1st, 2006 has been reverted by one party several times Siddiqui 15:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Reverts have stopped so I do not think it is necessary to protect. i am filing a mediation cabal regarding this so it is necessary to keep the article unprotected for the convenience of mediators.Hkelkar 15:16, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Request for Protect. The above mentioned user reverted this page many times and wants to tie the revert war in Cheema page to the Muhammad bin Qasim page.
    Siddiqui 16:11, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=81085048"