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
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:
==Current requests for protection==
==Current requests for protection==
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}

===={{la|The Walking Dead (video game)}}====
'''Temporary semi-protection:''' High level of IP vandalism. The article keeps getting updated with false release dates. Telltale releases episodes monthly and doesn't announce release dates until shortly before release, so the release date for the last episode won't even be announced until August. [[User:GuruGuru214|GuruGuru214]] ([[User talk:GuruGuru214|talk]]) 20:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


===={{la|BK Racing}}====
===={{la|BK Racing}}====

Revision as of 20:08, 15 May 2012

"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 of article protection, upload protection, or create 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.

    Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. The article keeps getting updated with false release dates. Telltale releases episodes monthly and doesn't announce release dates until shortly before release, so the release date for the last episode won't even be announced until August. GuruGuru214 (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Brookesv (talk) 19:39, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Transfer speculation and vandalism. --Jaellee (talk) 19:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. StringTheory11 19:21, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Persistent dispute involving appropriate content for an infobox. Jprg1966 (talk) 19:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Honey Singh (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Changing of assessment status by IPs. Please semi-protect the page for a period of atleast 2 months. Amartyabag TALK2ME 17:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. 2 months is too long for a talk page. Let's try 1 week first. --regentspark (comment) 19:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Repeated vandalism from unregistered users. SabreWolfy (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection: controversial editions at these articles that usually result in large discussions, protections and even blocks when done at pt.wikipedia.

    Please reconsider the decision of no protection. The user, whose account has been established for four days and just edit both articles, still insist on change facts commonly accepted and agreed in other Wikipedias, specially the Portuguese version (more complete) without references, just his POV. Mateus RM talk 10:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: I will leave to someone else since I declined it last time, but I will warn you that you are at the WP:3RR limit on both articles. You risk being blocked if you revert again. This is a content dispute and should go to WP:DRN. If another clerk wants to protect it until then, that is fine with me. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 12:52, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 16:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article is of sensitive subject, and has been vandalized by nationalists in the past, as it is now... WhiteWriterspeaks 16:31, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined There is no evidence of vandalism. You seem to be involved in a little editorial conflict, but the funny thing is that the back and forth between you and User:Christ194 is on a little matter that has nothing to do with the topic of the article (the total number of victims is not relevant to the alleged organ theft), and I've removed that part of the sentence (and the comma splice). Drmies (talk) 17:06, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent vandalism since release of protection on May 3rd. – Jonadin93 (talk) 16:16, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by unregistered editor with a dynamic IP. AussieLegend (talk) 16:16, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected I'm not sure I'd all of it vandalism, but it is disruptive. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Moderate level of IP vandalism. Please see the article history to find the number of vandalism by IP addresses and reverts of those vandalism.
    tausif(talk) 06:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I did look, but found no evidence of disturbing amounts of vandalism. Drmies (talk) 17:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Subject of much speculation with an announcement about his job status in the next 24 hours; unsourced edits from IPs and new users. Mosmof (talk) 15:59, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and rash edits to release and other sections, section blanking. Articles subject was released today and is getting heavy media attention. 0pen$0urce (talk) 14:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:00, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: String of dynamic IPs repeatedly inserting inappropriate image. A registered editor was already indeffed for it. Struway2 (talk) 14:13, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Article protected by User:JamesBWatson. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent high rate of vandalism by IPs on a BLP. A temporary semi-protection of atleast one month must be made to avoid vandalism. Amartyabag TALK2ME 11:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. via BLP concerns. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 13:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: For similar reasons to the RFP for "The Magician's Code" (seven entries below this). IP editors have been removing information related to the ending of the final episode in a bid to remove spoilers from the article. This contravenes WP:SPOILERS, and while the page for the episode has stabilised, I have to keep reverting the season article, so I'm requesting semi-protection for a week, or until things calm down. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 08:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 13:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Moderate level of IP vandalism. Maybe this is premature. Never done this before. See recent edits and talk page. I just don't have the will to keep on reverting these edits. So unsubstantiated (And I belive completely false) information is going to be left on the biography of a living person Identz (talk) 03:30, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. BLP/NPOV concerns. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 12:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Moderate level of vandalism - references to fictional character edited in to actual person's biography. KaranJ (talk) 02:21, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:06, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: It's the season finale of "How I Met Your Mother", and it's getting a lot of IP edits that keep adding and removing information, particularly related to spoilers for the show. So I'm requesting temporary semi-protection for 24 or 48 hours (at the discretion of an admin) to keep the page stable. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Lots of activity, but not vandalism and the show has already aired. It should settle down on its own in a day. Inconvenient, perhaps, but not enough "bad" activity to justify a block at this time. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 12:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for unprotection

    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.

    Unprotection: This articles been on permanent semi-protection for awhile. Perhaps we could give it another shot? . SKATER Is Back 03:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) You should have contacted the protecting admin, Courcelles (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (who is still active), first before coming here. Done for you. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 12:31, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    We tried this last summer, in the NFL's offseason. It was a complete disaster, and I can't see how that would change trying it again. Courcelles 18:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    This is one of the most high profile BLPs we have regarding American sports, clearly shouldn't be unprotected. There been times that the vandalism was way too much to handle. Secret account 20:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: After reviewing the unprotect last summer, I'm inclined to respectfully disagree and say that unblocking is worth trying. It was only unblocked for 4 days and yes three people vandalized it. Two vandals were indef'ed, one was never blocked and still edits here. In the spirit of being "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" I think we have to at least try to unprotect articles from time to time. Protects are cheap and can be re-instituted if needed. I will let someone else decide, since I am in the minority here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 13:04, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection: Requesting unprotection to submit Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Afranet. Ryan Vesey Review me! 02:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Can you explain how this submission cured the deficiency identified in the AfD? What sources in your view establish notability? T. Canens (talk) 02:37, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    My belief in the notability of the article is primarily based on the information presented in the old Tehran times article and the Businessweek article . The current article relies a little heavily on some primary sources; however, I believe that the concerns addressed in the AFD in 2009 are met. Sources are a little on the short side; however, I believe more sources could be found in an arabic search. I specifically believe this because of the information presented about the various firsts that Afranet has (outlined in the old Tehran times article). Ryan Vesey Review me! 02:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, the Tehran Times one doesn't read like something independent from the company to me. The font of the title is very different, that, and the rather unusual red border, the pointer to the company's website "for more information" all suggest to me that it's not a real news article that qualifies as a secondary source. The Businessweek one looks like a routine entry in a database rather any serious, in-depth coverage. T. Canens (talk) 05:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, well it's not skin off of my nose if the article isn't created. I wouldn't call myself an exclusionist, but I'm certainly not an inclusionist. I was unaware of the problematic history of the article when I decided that it appeared notable after viewing the AFC page. I hope that you will leave this discussion open so I can see if the original editor has any desire to make a case. Ryan Vesey Review me! 05:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection: I don’t see why a redirect page requires protection. WoodyAllenGuy (talk) 13:13, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:George tan031993 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Unprotect for this bullshit bitch. FUCK YOU.

    Declined and blocked IP for 24 hours. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 12:37, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for 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.

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    Semi-protection: Infamous Indonesian anime misinformation vandal has put several pieces of misinformation across the last five days using different IP addresses (last two times using 222.124.4x.*). - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 10:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 1 week in line with history of vandalism. --Fæ (talk) 10:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Content dispute/edit warring. IP has admitted he will disrupt the article if he doesn't get his way. El0i (talk) 09:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 1 month based on previous problematic history. --Fæ (talk) 10:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Increase in vandalism due to recent media publicity.Monkeymanman (talk) 07:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined considering the publicity, this seems still at a manageable low level of weak vandalism at just a couple of times in a week. --Fæ (talk) 10:35, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Edit warring of IP. GrayFullbuster (talk) 06:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined as this has been mostly the same IP, now blocked for 31 hours. If a range of IPs comes into play, it would be worth raising again. --Fæ (talk) 10:38, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotect so it can be turned into a redirect to Porcelain Black, which establishes notability. Per request at Redirects for creation. Huon (talk) 09:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected, done by ‎Thumperward. Huon (talk) 10:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=492751723"