Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

"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.

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 protection Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level Request unprotection Request a specific edit to a protected page Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here Request edit

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.

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

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, IP vandalism. Currently today's FA'd article. Recommend 48 hours.(24-36 hours also good) which will stop vandalism till article no longer so prominently featured on main page which makes it a high visibility target..Xp54321 ^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 01:40, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism seems to be at normal levels right now. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:47, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Chris Long (American football) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

To prevent an edit war I request protection of this page until dispute resolution is over. I requested help in starting a dispute resolution earlier. Pats1 is now, in my view, putting a level of scrutiny on quotes that is just not possible to meet and is not required by wiki. I realize I will get warned as well, but I do not want to edit war and I won't do it. I don't. I want this to be over but I also reserve the right to edit. I was told I could edit and I did. But it was not in a vicious way. So, I request a temporary pretection for this article for a cooling down period.72.0.36.36 (talk) 00:40, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi protection Dispute, Currently and edit war, requesting semi-protection, there have been multiple violations of 3RR and some sockpuppetry, mostly from anons. Talk page is being used, but is not preventing war..Grey Wanderer | Talk 00:25, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Math Champion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

indefinite semi protection Per user's request..BoL (Talk) 00:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Done « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 00:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

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

Semi-protect: Persistent vandalism of the "Family" section by anonymous IP users, dating as far back as January 2008.--Redeagle688 (talk) 00:22, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 00:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, incoming Euro 2008 vandalism.→Christian.И 21:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected until 29 June 2008. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Islamochat.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

'create-protection'« Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 20:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Creation protected PeterSymonds (talk) 21:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

FIFA World Rankings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect: high level of vandalism from IP's and newly-registered users, particularly regarding to the monthly rankings and related information. The flow of vandalism is possibly due to ongoing UEFA Euro 2008 tournament.  ARTYOM  16:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

semi-protect. It's been a subject of vandalism, due to it's popularity on the internet, and YouTube. Truthfully, I was suprised that it wasn't protected! I think this is a popular article, and it may come under more vandalism in the future. L337p4wn (talk) 16:39, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:06, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

semi-protect. The page was lifted from protection on June 16th. Since then had about a half dozen vandalisms including one that happened 10 minutes after the protection was lifted. Pinkkeith (talk) 15:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

Full protection. This article has gone through so many unproductive edits in the past few weeks that I'm not sure which version to revert to. Anthony Rupert (talk) 06:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

All day there has been consensus building at this article with me, Pinkkeith and fan of garycoleman. Over the past several days an Administrator, Pats1, has been in a huge fight with other admins for the blocking of user chrisjnelson. nelson has been banned for 2 weeks. I was the one who reported nelson on more than one occasion. Pats1 is also a user I think abuses his power. Pats1 and nelson are friends and in my view WP:OWN the NFL project. There has been a dispute at the Cr his Long (American Football) for a while. it was between me and nelson. It is what lead to nelson's blocking. It is my opinion, my view, that since then Pats1 has been targeting my copy-edits and in my opinion darn near cyber-stalking me. I spend a lot of time today trying to build a consensus at the Chris Long talk page to no avail. Pats1 will not budge. It was then that Pats1 went over to Jack Youngblood and just crucified it with zero attempt at dispute resolution, zero attempts at WP:CONSENSUS building and with zero respect for my edits and those of the others there. As you can see from the Jack Youngblood talkpage there were improvements made all day with three of us. He nevr participated or engaged with us he just did what he wanted and posted after-the-fact.

Then, all hell broke loose in my view. I have reported Past1's behavior at the AN/I board. This has not phased Pats1. He is, as he says, "continuing with my copy-editing". I ask that ALL his edits be reverted to how it was before he arrived (He'd never been there is 4 years) and that it is locked until the dispute resolution and the AN/I are resolved. If it is done with his edits it would be a mess. He is not tweaking it, he's just gutting it. Now, I ask for one indulgence. In is this: He will claim he's "improving it". He will claim he's done nothing wrong. Unless you look at the history and the pattern and practice here an injustice will occur. It is my opinion that he is disrupting wikipedia to make a point. That is a serious charge. It means I do not believe his edits are in good faith. I think they are done as a grudge. I think the next article he rips will be another one I have contributed mightily too. I think this is a target at me and my work and not good-faith edits. I ask for your prompt attention and ask that you take this as a serious complaint. I know I am just an IP but I have a good reason but I still think I have a right to fairness.

Again, I ask that his edits be reverted and the page locked until such time as a resolution is reached. Respectfully submitted72.0.36.36 (talk) 02:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Note: Both users warned for edit warring. Tan | 39 04:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Current requests for unprotection

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.

Secret Maryo Chronicles (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This article was deleted in 2005 for not being notable, and currently has a create protect (since 2007). This multi-platform open source game has had 16 revisions since the article deletion date, and it's currently one of the higher quality open source games out there, and is as notable as or more notable than many of the other open source games with Wikipedia articles. It was written up as the #1 Open source Game by APC Magazine in January--the five games it beat out on the list all have Wikipedia articles. It has also been recognized in wider circulation print magazines as well (I think I found about it in Computer Gaming World). Erik Harris (talk) 03:17, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

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

He is speaking today at the National Press Club;[1] not sure the source of the previous "complaint" but this should make him a public figure. -- Kendrick7^talk 19:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Declined I just looked at the previous version of the article, and there is no way that I would consider unsalting it without a good reason. Write a draft in your userspace and ask again; the BLP-incinerating, unsourced garbage that was the old article is undoubtedly the reason it was protected in the first place. Horologium (talk) 23:21, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I have written a version on Talk:Larry Sinclair. -- Kendrick7^talk 23:38, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

He's also put up a new version at Larry Wayne Sinclair to get around the page protection. BradV 14:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Moved from Completed Requests to be looked again. BradV 14:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

You know, as much as the protection circumvention annoys me, I think that we should at least let this be created and take to AfD to get a consensus. The article is sourced, and it's possible that notability criteria is met. Tan | 39 14:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

All of this happened about 12 hours; I fail to see why it was so incredibly urgent to add this to Wikipedia that Kendrick had to work around the salting to add this article. (I'm sorry I didn't respond immediately, but some of us need to sleep and work/study/whatever.) At least this article is sourced and at least has the potential to be NPOV, otherwise I'd speedy it as well, citing G4. Since it's been recreated under a different title, I'd suggest running the AFD on the new article and then requesting a page move if it survives. I'm not sure if this person is notable enough to merit an article in Wikipedia. Horologium (talk) 14:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC) (refactored to eliminate NPOV violation on my part.) Horologium (talk) 20:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Hahah, tell us what you really think, Horologium. Like I said, I agree with you that it's annoying that the protection was circumvented, but trying my best to AGF and do what's best for the project, I'm gonna fire up an AfD on the page. Oh, and I'm sure you know G4 isn't for articles that were previously speedied... Tan | 39 14:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

It needs to be moved to Larry Sinclair first, however. His middle name is unsourced, and not relevant to the article. BradV 14:49, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Eh, it doesn't really matter, does it? Here's the AfD - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Wayne Sinclair Tan | 39 14:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

"Eh, it doesn't really matter" is not a justification for leaving this article at the wrong page. I understand that you thought it would be deleted anyway, but as the AfD is heading towards a keep, I ask you to please reconsider. BradV 16:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I meant that I don't think it matters for the moment. Even though I started the AfD, you can see my by sentiments above (and my AfD nom statement) that I actually am leaning towards "keep". Anyways, I think it will just cause confusion now, is a page move really necessary right now? If some other admin wants to trump me on this for reasons I am missing, feel free. Tan | 39 16:58, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

There are more sources than before (although converting them to inline refs would be a nice idea), so I don't necessarily disagree with keeping the article now. However, the last version under the original title was an absolute travesty—poorly constructed, unreferenced, utterly lacking in balance and NPOV, and lacking relevant context. It was absolutely an appropriate speedy deletion, although it should have been a G11 rather than a G4. I am not going to participate any further in discussions on this subject, but I would request that we wait until the AFD is closed before moving Larry Wayne Sinclair to Larry Sinclair. Moving an article during an AFD is always a bad thing. Horologium (talk) 20:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Current requests for significant edits to a protected page

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

WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2009 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection Vandalism, IP's and newly registered users continue to add speculation (unannounced information without a reliable source. There is also continued vandalism to the article, such as blanking, and spam. Needs protection for a while..SRX^--LatinoHeat 14:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PeterSymonds (talk) 14:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

User:RyanLupin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite semi protection: I previously had my userpage semi-protected indefinitely due to vandalism, this morning I moved my userpage over to a subpage and then linked back to it. Obviously the protection would have been moved along with it, would it be possible to protect my main userpage again? ——Ryan | t • c 12:36, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected --Oxymoron⁸³ 12:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

semi-protection Vandalism, Only just come to this article, but seems to be a target for vandalism from anonymous IPs and newly created accounts..~~ [Jam]^[talk] 12:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

Please creation-protect this page. Recreated twice already today. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Declined - The article has only be created twice, maybe unintentionally the second time. This is a good faith effort of a newcomer. Cenarium ^Talk 12:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

Please semi-protect. Persistent nationalist bickering/disruption by anons over whether she is Italian or Croatian.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 06:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

5 disruptive reverts within 4 days by the same anon user isn't enough? If the same user returns, I hope you'll reconsider.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 12:44, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

Salt Both PowerWise and Powerwise. Created and spammily deleted several times over the past week: [2] and [3] Yngvarr (c) 11:49, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Creation protected PeterSymonds (talk) 11:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi-protection , Because the page has not been edited for so long..By Redsaph 10:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Unprotected (that was what you wanted, right?) Kusma (talk) 10:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Destroy All Humans! 2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, A few Anon Users continuously add obcene content to the article..SWJS: The All Knowing Destroy All Humans! Nerd(Cortex Scan) 06:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 08:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

Is a well known youtube celebrity who has released an album with Comedy Central Records; merits a page.

Declined Please create the article in a personal sandbox in your user space so that it conforms to Wikipedias policies, especially notability, verifiability, and WP:MUSIC. When you have completed the page please request unprotection again with a link to the draft. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 08:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

full-protection. We wish to have full, indefinite protection on the grounds that tonight someone created a wiki Puma_PAC site and there was immediately a rush of relentless vandalism and interference with protected free speech. The wiki Puma_PAC site was deleted, we have since rebuilt it. We feel full protection will prevent this from happening again.Trish PUMA (talk) 04:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Declined - The vandalism has died down/been dealt with. The extent of the vandalism was never extreme enough to warrant indef full protection and we don't preemptively protect pages in the first place. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 06:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Tyciol (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

indefinate semi-protection My user page has been the subject of heavy and persistant vandalism. In all cases, anonymous IPs have deleted things or replaced it with vulgar commentary. I would like to be able to edit it myself, and leave it open to confirmed accounts who are trying to be legitimately helpful, as they have reverted vandalism in the past. I'd rather same them the trouble though, the only thing that I should need help with are my own mistakes, not attacks from other people. Tyciol (talk) 05:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected against editing, and full protection against moving. Hope that's ok. PhilKnight (talk) 06:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Tyciol/Diablo III (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

indefinate semi-protection This is a deleted personal article hosted in my user area subject to heavy and persistant vandalism. I also don't really want people to add anything to it. Mostly IPs have been making bad edits, semi protection will allow me and other responsible wikipedia editors to edit it. Tyciol (talk) 05:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected. PhilKnight (talk) 06:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. The page was protected until very recently, but it started to develope high level of vandalism again. Help please Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PhilKnight (talk) 04:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Bully 2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

protect against recreation. Article is about a game that has not actually been announced. It has been CSD'd five times, see also its deletion log. McJeff (talk) 02:55, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Already protected.. PhilKnight (talk) 04:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi-protection , Getting to be an edit war w/ an IP that extensively contributed. Continuing to remove Conflict of Interest tag. .—Signed by KoЯnfan71 ^{My Talk} _{Sign Here!} 01:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

User(s) blocked.--JForget 01:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)