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
Cmanser (talk | contribs)
206 edits
Line 7: Line 7:
== Current requests for protection ==
== Current requests for protection ==
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}}

===={{ln|Psy_(rapper)}}====
'''Semi-protection:''' High level of IP vandalism. Charles 11:41, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


===={{la| List of Japanese inventions }}====
===={{la| List of Japanese inventions }}====

Revision as of 11:41, 4 September 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.

    [[:Psy_(rapper):{{{2}}}]] ([{{fullurl::Psy_(rapper):{{{2}}}|action=edit}} edit] | [[:Psy_(rapper) talk:{{{2}}}|talk]] | [{{fullurl::Psy_(rapper):{{{2}}}|action=history}} history] | [{{fullurl:Special:Whatlinkshere/:Psy_(rapper):{{{2}}}}} links] | [{{fullurl::Psy_(rapper):{{{2}}}|action=watch}} watch] | logs)

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Charles 11:41, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

    Protection: Edit warring despite the discussion at talk page. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 11:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Edit warring since September 2. An extended period of protection is required. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 10:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – the article is regular source of vandalism by some ips.Needs atleast one weeek protection. ---zeeyanketu talk to me 09:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:17, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: High-visibility templates. --Tyranitar Man (talk) 09:45, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – recent spate of disruptive editing. RashersTierney (talk) 09:44, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – the article has a long history of protection. The most recent being a 1.5 year edit semi & move sysop, and expiring in June 2012. The article recieves fairly consistent vandalism from IPs and new users. It looks like this article is going to be a fairly constant target of vandalism so I think indef semi-protection is the way to go. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from unregistered and newly registered users. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:18, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Psychonaut (talk) 08:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) Looks like this has been going on for a few days, recommend semi-protection for a few days to a week. Note: there hasn't been any previous page protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:11, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  11:24, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Edit warring and vandalism by IPs and socks. --DAJF (talk) 05:28, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This is a content dispute, editors need to work towards consensus on the talkpage rather than edit war. Yunshui 雲‍水 06:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Jamx1123 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Indefinite semi-protection: Jamx1123 is locked on all Wikimedia wikis, but IPs keep spamming the user's talk page. See the deleted revisions of the userpage and the move log for the user talk page. Jasper Deng (talk) 04:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected I only see one IP making edits to the page, so this could be dealt with by blocking, but since there seems to be no harm in semi-protecting this talkpage to pre-empt any future disruption (and yes, I know that's contrary to the protection policy - in this case I believe it's appropriate to IAR) I have done so. Other admins are free to disagree and unprotect if they wish. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – low-level edit war brewing. BeeSea (talk) 04:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandals are back. Mr. Vernon (talk) 03:46, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Only one IP that I can see, and Drmies has already blocked it. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:25, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Long-term semi-protection. Vandalism returned to this internet celebrity BLP once the six month semi-protection dropped. 117Avenue (talk) 03:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) While there was a little vandalism a few days after the semi-protection expired I don't believe there is enough recent activity to justify another semi-protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected indefinitely. With that protection history and the fact that it started again almost immediately, I'm happy to indef. GedUK  11:35, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term vandalism. Article protected multiple times and multiple edits RevDeleted. -- Luke (Talk) 01:10, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) Current semi-protection expires 01:12, 5 September 2012 (UTC). Given the article's protection history (and assuming an admin is willing to change to protection) I would suggest semi-protection for three to twelve months. I've left a message for User:Mark Arsten that this request is here. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined Let's leave it till Mark has a look. It's pretty unusual for another admin to extend someone else's protection. GedUK  11:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistant vandalism by IP's changing date of an episode. Grammarxxx (talk) 23:57, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  11:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Constant recent vandalism.--EclecticEnnui (talk) 23:36, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent edit warring by IPs against consensus; multiple previous protections have been tried, but IPs continue to edit war after protection lapses. Yobol (talk) 23:28, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected by administrator Toddst1. fully protected until 00:25, 11 September 2012 (UTC). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Permanent semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism with BLP issues. Most recent, by 92.90.21.11, particularly destructive. [1][2] Took until Collect pointed out the need for referencing [3][4] that I noticed everything 92.90.21.11'd done despite the efforts of other editors such as Mt. Vernon, Bbb23, and Collect. Besides Wikipedia's record with women isn't the best?[5] Joan Juliet Buck has been attracting the worst kind of BLP violations for awhile for unknown political reasons, and I believe efforts to build on this profile could be better spent elsewhere. thank you!--Aichikawa (talk) 20:39, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: from involved admin. IMO, there's no recent activity by non-auto-confirmed editors to justify even temporary semi-protection. The last and only two IP edits were by the same IP on September 1.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  11:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – A slow edit war spanning over a month, I reported it here before but no action was taken. SMS Talk 15:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Non-administrator comment) I see edit warring between two users. They haven't broken the 3RR yet, but I'm going to encourage them to discuss it or bring it to DRN. Electric Catfish 19:07, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's try pointing them to DRN for now, and if in the next 2-3 days there is more Edit warring, we can deal with it then. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 22:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined Non-admin closure following DeltaQuad's comment (adding template for script). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:06, 4 September 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.

    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

    Temporary Semi-protection: High level of unregistered IP vandalism, which includes their personal opinions, rumours, deletion of large portions of referenced work. Approximately 50% of edits are from unregistered users doing the above mentioned. Ericandude (talk) 01:09, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term vandalism and BLP disruptions. -- Luke (Talk) 01:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:54, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection Frequent vandalism by unregistered users. --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Facts, not fiction (talk) 00:34, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected by User:Acroterion.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:24, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lone boatman (talk) 19:06, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 22:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Against attempts at placing non existent, invented "autonomous status" at infobox. Envisaged special administrative measures (that were never applied due to posterior Civil Law Reform in Turkey) are being introduced as an autonomy status relying on either primary sources (Treaty) or unreliable ones. The issue can of course be handled within the article but adding that info into infobox is disruption, as the claimed status neither exists nor existed ever. (The current status of the island is neither contested in international law...). E4024 (talk) 15:51, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 22:00, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=510744122"