Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Od Mishehu (talk | contribs)
107,223 edits
Line 16: Line 16:
:{{RFPP|s|6 hours}} -- [[User:Flyguy649|Flyguy649]] [[User talk:Flyguy649|<sup>talk]]</sup> 17:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
:{{RFPP|s|6 hours}} -- [[User:Flyguy649|Flyguy649]] [[User talk:Flyguy649|<sup>talk]]</sup> 17:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)



===={{la|Paul Kwong}}====
'''temporary full protection''' ''Vandalism'' [[59.149.32.77]] is vandalising this page to satisfy an ego which he has been trying to do to me all day. Everypage I edit he vandalises but his has been espcellialy bad. He is also lying about his edits to get other editors on his side. Please protect page{[[User:Electrobe|Electrobe]] ([[User talk:Electrobe|talk]]) 17:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)}


===={{la|Direct Action Day}}====
===={{la|Direct Action Day}}====

Revision as of 17:31, 25 March 2008

"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.

    semi-protect. Article just came off of semi-protection. As soon as that happened, a high level of IP vandalism immediately started again. Can we extend protection for more than a week this time? Maybe a full month? Roguegeek (talk) 17:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi protection Vandalism, High levels of vandalism in past hour..Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 17:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 6 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Flyguy649 talk 17:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary full protection Vandalism Sumanch is taking off tags without discussing or satisfying other editors. Please protect page.203.99.185.176 (talk) 17:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary full protection Vandalism, I reverted an edit as it is potentially defamatory, explaining why on the talk page. The editor (who is a suspected sock under checkuser) has ignored this and reverted anyway. Request temp protection until checkuser has completed..Traditional unionist (talk) 16:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. If it's only one account, deal with the account and not with the page. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection Ongoing IP vandal targeting the image to be removed along nationalist lines [1], claiming copyright violation to picture of 100 years old. Earlier the same IP edited this template [2] with incivil edit comments. Attempt at another image is going on at Wikicommons [3] along the same lines. Please, protect this page from anon IPs edit warring along national lines. Thanks. Atabek (talk) 16:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Ongoing dynamic IP vandal targeting this BLP with homophobic and anti-Semitic content. Likely sock of User:David Shankbone's stalker. Banjiboi 16:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Waggers (talk) 16:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:86.136.227.59 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection User talk of blocked user, IP is vandalising talk page, they claim they can flood out wikipedia, please semi-protect page and maybe consider a longer term hard block..Momusufan (talk) 15:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary cascading semi-protection Vandalism.Staffwaterboy Talk♂ 15:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Also, why cascading? That's pretty hardcore for an article... Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 15:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

    full protection User talk of blocked user, Please fully protect, admin impersonator vandalising talk page.Momusufan (talk) 15:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected. Coincidently, I just protected it before coming here. -- Flyguy649 talk 15:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi protection until June 2008. The page is a hotspot for vandals because of the rooting interests of fans. We had a wave of vandalisim, and the page was semi-protected for a month, eliminating the vandalism. I'm requesting that the page be protected until the end of the season. -- Grant.Alpaugh 15:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. If the vandalism problem continues, you can request protection, but it doesn't appear to be a problem yet, as the page was just unprotected yesterday. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. This is regarding the chapter about D2X-XL: High level of vandalism/marking as advert w/o justification due to personal issues of a small group with the program's author. Karx11erx (talk) 13:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 15:19, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, Not sure why M. C. Escher is such a big target but 30% of the last 50 edits were to revert vandalism..xenocidic (talk) 13:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. No reason to do an indefinite protect at this time. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:90.196.3.244 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    temporary semi-protection User talk of blocked user, Blocked user that keeps blanking user page..GtstrickyTalk or C 13:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Done. Rudget. 13:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: - It has since been unprotected due to the establishment that the IP is in fact not blocked. Apologies for that mistake. Rudget. 13:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism, and very frequent (more than every other edit is vandalism, recently). STYROFOAM1994talkReview me! 12:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Rudget. 13:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Long term (over a month now) problem with anon adding disparaging commentary to these two articles. Anon changes IP addresses every time across a wide block. Several editors have used edit comments to ask anon to discuss, but the edits keep happening with no edity summary. As I'm an involved editor, I'm asking for another admin to put protection on these two pages. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 12:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Stifle (talk) 12:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, High level of IP vandalism.Soxred93 | talk bot 12:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Stifle (talk) 12:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection. Permanent (never stopping for very long time) IP vandalism on sourced, already discussed and cleared matter. These editors just delete information with sources and add WP:POV instead of it without any discussion. The article was temporarily semi-protected, but the vandalism came back quickly. Lykantrop (Talk) 11:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only three edits in the past three days. Stifle (talk) 12:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Alfred-Maurice de Zayas (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

    semit-protection Various single-purpose IPs regularly spam the talk page with their personal opinion about Mr de Zayas, and make personal attacks against logged-in users (like KarlV and me). --Schwalker (talk) 11:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Stifle (talk) 12:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection - A discussion is under way about whether this article should be merged into Central obesity. Certain users insist on merging the article before consensus is reached. -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 09:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined - this page has been protected before in an attempt to lock the page on the version preferred by one user and stifle discussion. Not going there again. Also not enough recent negative activity to justify protection. Stifle (talk) 11:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm actually trying to encourage discussion - surely merging the articles without debate, ignoring what consensus has been achieved is what stifles discussion? -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 12:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection - A discussion is under way about whether this article should be merged into Central obesity. Certain users insist on merging the article before consensus is reached. -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 09:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined - this page has been protected before in an attempt to lock the page on the version preferred by one user and stifle discussion. Not going there again. Also not enough recent negative activity to justify protection. Stifle (talk) 11:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm actually trying to encourage discussion - surely merging the articles without debate, ignoring what consensus has been achieved is what stifles discussion? -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk 12:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection - Since this page has been unprotected, users have again, been adding speculative episode titles to this article (but are hidden comments, like before). Mythdon (talk) 03:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Stifle (talk) 11:48, 25 March 2008 (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.

    The reason this page should be unprotected is because it is a prime example of Cape Breton Culture and Heritage. There are other various bands that are a part of the Cultural Music Influences from the East Coast. This musical arrangement is a great example of Heritage.

    Declined This page was protected from recreation due to copyright issues. If you really are interested in creating this article, feel free to create it in your userspace, on a subpage first. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

    It is protected, but as the user is gone, I see no reason why it should be. Tom.mevlie (talk) 09:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Not unprotected The main reason is because the user was adding personal attacks and vandalism, e.g. here. Stifle (talk) 12:52, 25 March 2008 (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.

    Tag it for G10 (or at the least, MFD) Consensus is that it's more vitriolic than most stuff. Sceptre (talk) 17:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already unprotected.. Hut 8.5 18:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    Temporary semi-protection to cool off vandalism. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 08:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Not even close, only one vandal edit in the last two weeks. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect for vandalism war. --Aleenf1 07:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. bu User:MBisanz. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Inexperienced user is not a valid reason for protection. 70.20.96.23 (talk) 04:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined The protection will automatically cease in about a day, then feel free to edit the page. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 08:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protect for a longer term period due to continued idiotic "his middle name is Steve because some Internet parody series says so" vandalism. JuJube (talk) 07:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 07:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect because of the almost daily IP vandalism. Yahel Guhan 06:37, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 07:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. High level of IP vandalism. It looks like the page was temporarily semi-protected, but was recently unprotected and subsequently vandalized. ← Michael Safyan (talk) 06:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 07:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Long time semi protect ongoing vandalism. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. —Kurykh 06:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary full protection Vandalism, Continued vandalism from shared IP. No response from admin to block request..Tcncv (talk) 06:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Why does this need protection? It's only one IP address that's been doing this over and over; has this gone to AIV? Why haven't you been consistently warning the user? One simple 24-hour block and problem solved; no need to protect page. Tan | 39 06:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    User(s) blocked. for 31 hours; no need to protect. And Tanthalas39, please tone down your comments; everyone has a learning curve, and don't need to be browbeaten through it. —Kurykh 06:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    My sincere apologies, I certainly didn't mean to bite! I was looking for further information - perhaps I didn't look far enough back in the history, etc. Point taken, I will back off my queries. Tan | 39 06:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Page protect request withdrawn - User IP has been blocked. Tcncv (talk) 06:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I had only requested page protect when I didn't get a quick response to the IP user block request. I mistakenly requested full protect (new user mistake). Thanks for the block Kurykh. -- Tcncv (talk) 06:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem Tan. We all appreciate all the work you do. I'm partly at fault for being impatient. -- Tcncv (talk) 06:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism - looks like kids love to mess with article and not many people watch it. TestPilot 04:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -MBK004 04:57, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, out of last 20 edits(mine excluded), whole 4 edits was not a vandalism or RV of vandalism. That's many. But what is more important - vandal edits stayed in the article at least for 2 weeks, with no one fixing them. Who cares? And yeah, I totally agree with you, those should not be considered "recent". TestPilot 05:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection IP vandalism. This page is the main spot of vandalism in the Philippines. Almost everyday there are vandalisms occured because of the popularity of the article, which also awarded as the most search personality in Google.com.ph click -->([4]here). We need a semi-protection of this article to prevent vandalism as soon as possible. We expect that our request will be granted. Thank You.{Kung Fu Master (talk) 03:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)}[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 04:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection IP vandalism. Only 1 edit in the past 6 days was not vandalism or a revert of vandalism. Footballfan190 (talk) 02:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. —Kurykh 03:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Vandalism/editing tests extend back for some time. Most of that vandalism is from IPs, and the amount of vandalism is disproportionate to the amount of good edits..Thinboy00 @151, i.e. 02:37, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. —Kurykh 03:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    un-protected Would like to update his information with factual information.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Austin56 (talk • contribs) 02:26, March 24, 2008

    Declined; inability to discern request. —Kurykh 03:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection IP vandalism. Just the amount in 1 day 

    is heavy. Footballfan190 (talk) 01:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Alexf42 01:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Many IPs continue to vandalize or destroy much of the content. Would like possible two week semi-protection..crassic![talk] 00:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected by administrator by Master of Puppets. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 01:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=200840385"