Wikipedia:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Acebrock (talk | contribs)
1,490 edits
→‎Current requests for unprotection: requesting that a talk page be unprotected
Line 46: Line 46:
: Not yet, in my opinion. This user ought to seek more common ground on the page's Talk. He has repeatedly been asked if he will abstain from edit warring or reverting if the page is unprotected (a "gentlemen's agreement" and seek to dissolve differences in Talk.) He has not committed himself to this. Too early still. - [[User:William Mauco|Mauco]] 19:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
: Not yet, in my opinion. This user ought to seek more common ground on the page's Talk. He has repeatedly been asked if he will abstain from edit warring or reverting if the page is unprotected (a "gentlemen's agreement" and seek to dissolve differences in Talk.) He has not committed himself to this. Too early still. - [[User:William Mauco|Mauco]] 19:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
::A page fully protected for 3 weeks? Too long, IMHO. I suggest it's time to find options other than protected the page. Regards, [[User talk:BenAveling|Ben Aveling]] 21:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
::A page fully protected for 3 weeks? Too long, IMHO. I suggest it's time to find options other than protected the page. Regards, [[User talk:BenAveling|Ben Aveling]] 21:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

===={{la|Talk:September 11, 2001 attacks}}====
'''Unprotect''' debate tha caused talk page protection is long over, plus the page was protected in violation of policy: a single user was banned and he was still debating as an anon, when [[user:MONGO|MONGO]] semi-protected the page. That was more than two months ago--[[User talk:Acebrock|Acebrock]] 10:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


==Current requests for significant edits to a protected page==
==Current requests for significant edits to a protected page==

Revision as of 10:25, 19 January 2007



"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.

    List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protection A lot of IP vandalism going on non-stop. --Caldorwards4 08:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Requesting semi-protection. Article is receiving sudden rash of "poop" & "shit" type childish vandalism. Featured article that needs a little help from the vandals. AuburnPilottalk 06:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC) ((Note that despite the fact that vandalism usually des happen on front page article, we tend not to sp them. Why I'm not positive, but I'm sure an admin can explain.))--Wizardman 06:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, as per Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection. Khoikhoi 06:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Well that's what I get for never viewing the Main page...had I noticed, I wouldn't have reported. Thanks for the quick reply anyways. AuburnPilottalk 06:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-Protect, recent attempts to vandalize the page were very evident. --Cahk 05:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-Protect, have a frequent anonymous editor randomly adding warning templates to my User Talk page for the past few days, gets tiring for myself and User:Kralizec! to continually revert the baseless vandalism. I haven't traced the various IP addresses being used (multiple, so simple IP-blocking won't help), but I imagine this is John Moore trying to be a muckraker again, as he has been banned multiple times from Wikipedia for harrassing me, threatening legal action (against both WMF and myself), trolling, edit-warring and similar bad behavior. A simple lock-down of the user-talk page for the next week or two would be greatly appreciated. Much thanks. Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 03:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    At&t (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-Protect As the merger between bellsouth has taken place and with the cinglar rebranding i feel semi-protection for a week or so may proactively prevent any vandalism.(Ke5crz 05:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

    Wireless From AT&T (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-Protect As the merger between bellsouth has taken place and with the cinglar rebranding i feel semi-protection for a week or so may proactively prevent any vandalism.(Ke5crz 05:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

    Move Protect As Cingular has recently changed names the pages has been moved back and forth over the last 48 hours From articles ranging from ATT Wireless, Cingular, to what it is currently named. a move protect would be helpfull till we finally figure out what it's name should be. (Currently this is the brand giving in sources I have seen.) EnsRedShirt 03:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Move Protection for now. Hopefully a consensus about the title can be found soon. TSO1D 04:24, 19 January 2007 (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.

    Wikipedia:Esperanza (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and Wikipedia talk:Esperanza (edit | project page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Request to unprotect- The talk page for Esperanza was protected due to an edit war over adding a notice to a discussion gag rule [1]. The discussion, which occurred on WP:DRV/EA is now over and there is no reason to keep the page protected from adding the notice in question.

    The main Esperanza page on WP:EA, however, was protected due to an edit war over a paragraph regarding the DRV debate. [2] If there is still a doubt over the unprotection of WP:EA, I would be happy to discuss the paragraph in question on WT:EA.--Ed ¿Cómo estás?Reviews? 04:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Request to unprotect or change to semiprotect. It was protected in 30 December, I believe 3 weeks is enough.--MariusM 16:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Not yet, in my opinion. This user ought to seek more common ground on the page's Talk. He has repeatedly been asked if he will abstain from edit warring or reverting if the page is unprotected (a "gentlemen's agreement" and seek to dissolve differences in Talk.) He has not committed himself to this. Too early still. - Mauco 19:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    A page fully protected for 3 weeks? Too long, IMHO. I suggest it's time to find options other than protected the page. Regards, Ben Aveling 21:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:September 11, 2001 attacks (edit | [[Talk:Talk:September 11, 2001 attacks|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Unprotect debate tha caused talk page protection is long over, plus the page was protected in violation of policy: a single user was banned and he was still debating as an anon, when MONGO semi-protected the page. That was more than two months ago--Acebrock 10:25, 19 January 2007 (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.

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

    Article has recently been protected due to edit warring. One the parties involved appears to have committed a 3RR violation in the process (please refer to this checkuser request for details), hence requesting article to be reverted to the last revision from before the edit war. - Cyrus XIII 01:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fulfilled/denied requests

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

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Duribald 20:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Agree with the request. It is a recurring problem, but has become worse in the last few days. Blueboar 21:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected--Húsönd 21:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Full protection - an edit war has started. Nareklm 20:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected due to revert warring. Nishkid64 20:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect - High level IP vandalism from multiple users. -- TimVickers 19:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 20:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Campeonato Brasileiro Série A (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    protect. Revert war just emerged and User:21JuL74 insists blank sourced material and ignore Wikipedia: Verifiability. --Ragnarok Addict 19:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected due to edit war.--Húsönd 21:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Catchpole 17:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 20:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protect Been getting vandal attacks from a wide range of anons (who could be proxies) for the last 48 hours. It seems that there is vandalism every 2 hours or so, with multiple instances of sandboxes/vandalism. A semi-protect for a couple of days can take off the attention I think. Baristarim 16:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a few days. Nishkid64 20:50, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Scranton Preparatory School‎ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect or protect There has been lots of abuse. A school administrator wants it protected. Mike6271 16:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 20:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Tadcaster Grammar School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect. Lots of anon vandalism. — cBuckley (Talk • Contribs) 16:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 20:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection to advert or at least contain an imminent edit war, following the removal of uncited information per WP:V. A checkuser request to see whether Darkcat21 and 62.57.22.131 are the same person and in 3RR violation is in progress, but since this editor appears to operate from a variable IP address and has proven to be very determined to protect his/her contributions even when at odds with Wikipedia policy, blocking IP based edits would still help a great deal to diffuse the situation. - Cyrus XIII 15:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected due to edit war.--Húsönd 21:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protect. Being edited to read cusswords and non-facts Rbotti 13:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Also, the offending IP has been blocked. -- Natalya 17:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Requesting semi protection. A anon editor repeatedly adds highly controversial unsourced material about living persons.Itsmejudith 11:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 20:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Our Lady of Fatima University (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Request to unprotect the school may be facing some controversies in the past but i dont find a necessity to protect it like other controversial articles that need further explanations. controversial inputs in an article can be cited and semi-protecting it may only lead to knowledgeable unregistered users at bay †Bloodpack† 15:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Un-protected. It's been protected for long enough. Hopefully things have calmed down since then. Nishkid64 21:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    This has been protected for over two weeks now. The hanging of Saddam is long over, protection is no longer needed. 141.211.175.235 15:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Un-protected. It's been protected for long enough. Hopefully things have calmed down since then. Nishkid64 21:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    Requesting semi-protection due to anon disruption. Khoikhoi 03:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected until the user stops or goes to the talk page to discuss his/her changes. Nishkid64 03:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Template:Tv.com person (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Semi-protection High-risk template. Although possibly full protection, since I see very little need to edit it... Gzkn 02:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected because of high-risk. Cbrown1023 02:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=101762174"