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
NotTfue123 (talk | contribs)
150 edits
Requesting semi-protection of Khadga Prasad Oli. (TW)
m delete
Line 1: Line 1:
{{delete|Test}}
<noinclude><!-- Please put protection templates *inside* the noinclude, because this page is transcluded -->{{Short description|Wikimedia noticeboard for requesting protection of pages}}{{/Header}}{{Floating link|class=sysop-show extendedconfirmed-show|Administrator instructions|Administrator instructions}}
<noinclude><!-- Please put protection templates *inside* the noinclude, because this page is transcluded -->{{Short description|Wikimedia noticeboard for requesting protection of pages}}{{/Header}}{{Floating link|class=sysop-show extendedconfirmed-show|Administrator instructions|Administrator instructions}}
{{pp-move-indef}}
{{pp-move-indef}}

Revision as of 11:03, 9 April 2019

"WP:RFP" and "WP:RPP" redirect here. You may also be looking for Wikipedia:Requests for permissions, Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission, or Wikipedia:Random page patrol.
    Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.
    Shortcuts

    Before requesting, read the protection policy. Full protection is used to stop edit warring between multiple users or to prevent vandalism to high-risk templates; semi-protection and pending changes are usually used to prevent IP and new user vandalism (see the rough guide to semi-protection); and move protection is used to stop pagemove revert wars. Extended confirmed protection is used where semi-protection has proved insufficient (see the rough guide to extended confirmed protection)

    After a page has been protected, it is listed in the page history and logs with a short rationale, and the article is listed on Special:Protectedpages. In the case of full protection due to edit warring, admins should not revert to specific versions of the page, except to get rid of obvious vandalism.

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



    Current requests for increase in protection level

    Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

    Shortcuts

    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.


    Gukesh Dommaraju

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. — Benison (Beni · talk) 13:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Likely collateral damage as one or several users who are making improvements would be affected by the requested protection. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 19:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:2024–25 Romanian presidential election

    Reason: Blatant WP:FORUM violations. Borgenland (talk) 17:24, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 20:13, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Killing of Brian Thompson

    Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Consistent addition of POV material, edit warring to an extent. Edit War Checker flashes red. EF5 17:40, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 20:10, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    The Game Awards 2024

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – This need to be protected prior to the start of the event to prevent any weeaboos ruined the editing of the winners list. VernardoLau (talk) 18:09, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Pages are not protected preemptively. ☩ (Babysharkboss2) 18:17, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Guess I shall wait till the end of the event before I could request the protection since early protection don't work out here. VernardoLau (talk) 18:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 19:50, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Assadist–Saddamist conflict

    Reason: high vandalism amid geopolitical conflict AstronomyMaster1 (talk) 18:41, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 20:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    IIHF Continental Cup

    Reason: Semi-Protection: Constant IP vandalism about representation. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 21:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. El_C 21:32, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Jessie Buckley

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Frequently vandalised by IP editors. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 21:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. El_C 21:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Jerry Speziale

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Article subject persistently making highly POV edits with unreliable / dubious sources. Ravensfire (talk) 23:30, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. El_C 07:41, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Beyoncé 2018 Coachella performance

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism following Netflix film announcement. --Another Believer (Talk) 00:03, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. El_C 07:42, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Ulf Samuelsson

    Temporary extended confirmed: BLP policy violations – Persistent IP vandalism/attempts to bash this BLP. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 01:08, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. El_C 07:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Swiss International Airlines

    Semi protection: IPs removing images without a valid explanation. Triila73 (talk) 03:45, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. El_C 07:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Mahmoud Reza Khavari

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism trying to remove sourced information from multiple accounts. . Masterofthename (talk) 04:04, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. El_C 07:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Hakan Şükür

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Jingiby (talk) 04:09, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. El_C 07:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    A new sock has attacked this article. Please, protect it. Jingiby (talk) 09:14, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Creative Commons

    Indefinite semi-protection: The page is about important organization and I just solved query in which vandalism was done which I removed just now!!. NotTfue123 (Talk) 09:57, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. El_C 09:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Khadga Prasad Oli

    Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – He is person with lots of supporter and haters. Haters may be the problem in his defamation. He is also Prime Minister. NotTfue123 (Talk) 10:58, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    Shortcuts

    Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin on 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.

    Shortcuts

    Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin on 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.

    Shortcuts

    Urdu

    Reason:Article is in a poorly written state and barely gets meaningful contributions since it was last protected. No signs of disruptive editing for a long time either.Axedd (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Axedd: Is the long-term abuser that caused the article to be ECP'd still active on other articles? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Last time this specific user was active was 4 years ago according to his case page. I believe another sock caused this page to locked over an year ago for edit warring, but they weren't solely interested in this particular page. Axedd (talk) 16:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The case page is not a reliable indicator of if an LTA is active or not, especially if they're reveling in the attention. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 08:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Pinging @Yamaguchi先生 --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    )     20:18, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you Axedd for being in touch and Jéské for the ping. Axedd, you are already able to edit this article in the currently protected state. For context, there have been over 18 different page protections applied over the years due to long term abuse, block evasion, and persistent disruption in general. In light of this, was there any specific reason that you're looking to see this page unprotected? Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 23:34, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Metaverse

    Reason: The protection is no longer necessary because i believe that the metaverse is now less associated with crypto and the blockchain - especially after the rise of spatial computing. 67.209.128.24 (talk) 15:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Suggested action: Lower to WP:WHITELOCK/WP:PCPP to prevent disruptive editing from cryptospammers while still allowing for broader contribution from legitimate editors (especially IPs like me). Otherwise, if no cryptospam is expected, remove protection completely. 67.209.128.24 (talk) 15:51, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Pinging @El C. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    )     16:19, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Brianna Wu

    Unprotection: Requesting a reduction to indef WP:ECP, per conversation on talk page of imposing administrator. Move protection can remain at indef sysop. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 23:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I'll have to disagree. Just look at the page history. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 05:28, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Eric the Actor

    Reason: The page was protected due to BLP, and is still protected for that reason despite Eric dying in 2014. 100.7.34.111 (talk) 00:15, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Jonghyun

    Reason: The page was protected due to BLP, and is still protected for that reason despite Jonghyun dying in 2017. If the page is to stay protected, the protection reason should at least be changed. 100.7.34.111 (talk) 12:51, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    2024 Formula One World Championship

    Reason: The season is completed. 2A02:C7C:A01:3E00:6416:9E81:7DAB:2ECD (talk) 13:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    The protection expires in less than two weeks. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Hedwig Kohn

    Unprotection: User:SouthernNights place an indefinite semi-protect on Hedwig Kohn. While obviously a semi-protect was needed as a result of very heavy Google Doodle related vandalism, I somehow don't think it was his intention to make it indefinite. The article has never been subject to protection in the past and the vandalism was of a transient nature, i.e. Google Doodle related. It seems 3 days would have been sufficient. I have notified the protecting administrator, User:SouthernNights but he is not on regularly, so leaving a request here as well. I request that the semi-protect be modified so as to expire on April 8, 2019, which is three days, which seems sufficient. Safiel (talk) 01:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Safiel:, looking through the article, I'm inclined to agree with you. I do see User:SouthernNights is sporadic in their edits here, but let's give them a chance to explain themselves first. If it's not addressed by then, I'd be willing to unprotect the article after a three day period. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Layla Moran

    Temporary Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing by IP editors to include a bold edit on a WP:BLP, ignoring the article's talk page. May be politically motivated. Domeditrix (talk) 09:20, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I would certainly decline a semi-protection. From the talk page discussion, which has not been completed, it is clear that this is a content dispute involving both confirmed and not confirmed users. The article should be either fully protected (and I am not sure I see a need for this at the moment) or not protected at all. The talk page discussion should run its course.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:27, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Waiting for a second opinion.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:27, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    User:Ymblanter I agree that the discussion on the talk page has not been completed – the reason for the request is to prevent IP addresses from reverting to include the contentious bold edit while the discussion is still ongoing. As I understand, the default position of WP:BLPs, per WP:NOCONSENSUS, is for contentious bold edits not to appear on the page until some form of consensus has been reached or ruling applied. A temporary semi-protection request is a way of upholding that. Please correct me if my interpretation of WP:NOCONSENSUS is incorrect. If my interpretation of that policy is correct, but this isn't an avenue for upholding it, then I'd appreciate if you could help point me in the right direction. Domeditrix (talk) 11:32, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    User:Ymblanter All three reverts were done by three separate IPs, two of which have only ever edited this article. Of the extended confirmed accounts that have commented in favour of the reverts, two are are old accounts both created 2 years ago (2 years 2 months, 2 years 5 months) that have never edited before except on this article. Do you not find this suspicious? Mvolz (talk) 12:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not particularly care whether the IPs and two new users are the same person or not, however, I see that their edits are not vandalism, not BLP violations, and that they are engaged at the talk page discussion. Unless they are all a sock of a blocked user, which so far I see no evidence of, semi-protection would give confirmed users an advantage in a content dispute.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:29, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that's the idea; using socks and anonymous IPs gives a single user an advantage over confirmed users in a content dispute, by making it *appear* as if there are multiple people on their side, when in fact there is not. It also allows them to bypass 3RR. Stopping this is *why* we have page protection. Mvolz (talk) 14:18, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I disagree. Let us wait for a second opinion.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Additional info: one of the IPs that made the most recent revert has been blocked: Special:Contributions/2607:FEA8:BE60:28E:D8D4:87C7:B7C3:7FA0 Mvolz (talk) 15:01, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Ok, this is a completely different story then. I will protect now.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:27, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Additional info: That IP range block associated with Special:Contributions/2607:FEA8:BE60:28E:D8D4:87C7:B7C3:7FA0 by User:Bbb23 was performed without revealing any evidence. I think there ought to be more proof provided that past edits associated with that IP bear any relation to the current discussion relating to the Layla Moran page. There is some questionable history, sure, but it looks like it is from a very long time ago. My best guess is that given the sensitive political nature of the page, Domeditrix did not initially get their way and is now trying leverage their contacts (or socks) and weed out opponents to their point of view from the talk page. This is pure bias. I am horrified at the allegations of sockpuppetry I am facing, when all I have done is stimulate discussion and share knowledge by writing up some legitimate and fully referenced content. As Ymblanter points out, this is in no way vandalism - just petty bullying by Domeditrix. Also, the block was obviously used to swing the decision on page protection in the first place! Unbelievable! Blatant WP:BITE and WP:AGF violations at the very least, not to mention corruption of WP:NOCONSENSUS practices. (Sophie Mills (talk) 21:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC))[reply]

    Faggot cell

    Semi-protection: Title contains slur for a homosexual man. An1alias (talk) 08:19, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests
    Shortcut

    Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.

    • Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
    • Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{Edit COI}} template should be used.
    • Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
    • If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
    • This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
    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.
    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests


    Template:IPA pulmonic consonants/table

    This, I think, is the first time I've made a suggestion. Hopefully, I'm doing this correctly.

    The lateral fricative voiced retroflex, as an example, has an IPA representation of ɖɭ˔ according to its Wikipedia page, but the IPA Pulmonic table and other tables use the Unicode representation in the table and any font I have found just doesn't handle that character,

    Would it be better to use the IPA representation which I think many fonts handle since the table has 'IPA' in its title and its link points to the Wikipedia page with both representations? The linked article each cell in the table states that the representation the IPA version and that the Unicode character is implied from that.

    I'd be happy to make a list of each table and cell where this occurs if that is necessary and you think these will be worthwhile changes. BLWBebopKid (talk) 19:51, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Pinging @Kwamikagami as they are likely to have some insight to these issues. For me personally, I'm not sure. I happen to have fonts installed that handle the extIPA symbols, but I'm in the stark minority there. Remsense ‥ 论 01:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ExtIPA is IPA. It's just a specialized subset. For example, extIPA can be used in the 'Illustrations of the IPA' published in JIPA.
    The issue is one of font support. The letters in question date to 2015, though they weren't added to Unicode until 2021. There are websites that list fonts that support various characters. These are supported by the SIL fonts, which are the best free IPA fonts available. If you don't have a good font installed, you're not going to be able to view IPA correctly anyway. That's why we have the IPA notice in articles, that you may need to install an IPA font to view the article properly. — kwami (talk) 05:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Leo Frank

    Original = "Leo Max Frank (April 17, 1884 – August 17, 1915) was an American lynching victim convicted in 1913" After= "Leo Max Frank (April 17, 1884 – August 17, 1915) was an Jewish-American lynching victim convicted in 1913" Anthonys210 (talk) 17:55, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Not done – Please read MOS:ETHNICITY, in particular the Isaak Asimov example. Favonian (talk) 18:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Create a level 3 header with a link to the article in question, then a {{Pagelinks}} template and then the reason. It looks like this: Example (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) your request here. ~~~~

    Handled requests

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

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=891660132"