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
Requesting semi-protection of Matt Hardy. (TW)
Line 145: Line 145:


'''Temporary semi-protection'''. High level of IP disruption, removal of sourced content and POV changes.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 23:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
'''Temporary semi-protection'''. High level of IP disruption, removal of sourced content and POV changes.--[[User:TriiipleThreat|TriiipleThreat]] ([[User talk:TriiipleThreat|talk]]) 23:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

=== [[:Matt Hardy]] ===
* {{pagelinks|Matt Hardy}}

'''Temporary semi-protection:''' Persistent [[WP:VAND|vandalism]] – Constant Vandalism . MatthewTardiff 23:09, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


== Current requests for reduction in protection level ==
== Current requests for reduction in protection level ==

Revision as of 23:09, 27 February 2017

"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 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.

    The entire Born of Osiris discography

    Indefinite semi-protection: Please indefinitely semi protect the entire Born of Osiris discography. It consists of these five pages as follows:

    The IP editors never do anything except make rampant genre wars and try to insist that their first EP is instead a full length (thus corrupting the entire chronological lineup of their albums thereafter with edits like changing the text where it says their first full length to "second album" and second album to "third album" ect). there really is never any helpful IP edits to these pages and i don't think there ever will be. it's especially disruptive since im the only one that reverts these and im not on wikipedia every single day to babysit them . Second Skin (talk) 18:48, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Vanamonde (talk) 03:32, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    List of football clubs in England by competitive honours won

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP edits have recently caused a lot of disruption to the page, people have been removing honours and incorrect editing the table following the recent League Cup final. A week's protection at least would be appreciated. Mountaincirque 12:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined The disruption seems to have passed and the last two IP edits have been positive. Yaris678 (talk) 17:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Karunamaya Goswami

    * Karunamaya Goswami (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Temporary Semi protection: This annon is disrupting the page. They are capitalizing sections and removing content from sections. Gary "Roach" Sanderson (talk) 18:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Desiigner

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. General Ization Talk 19:00, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Amortias (T)(C) 22:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Morecambe F.C.

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Deliberate attempts to add false information, from SPA accounts and IP editors. . Exemplo347 (talk) 19:16, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Amortias (T)(C) 22:02, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Dred Scott v. Sandford

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – pending changes not working, target of school ips. WNYY98 (talk) 19:39, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined The editing rate on this article is not enough to justify indefinite semi-protection. Pending changes is working pretty well at preventing vandalism from being seen by readers on the occasions that it does happen, and allowing good faith edits through when they happen. Mz7 (talk) 21:27, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Bates and Dittus

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Stupid to ask for protection of a redirect, but it's pretty consistent vandalism at this point. Onel5969 TT me 19:40, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mz7 (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Fastlane (2017)

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Lots and lots of IP disruptive editing following the expiry of the semi-protection. The event is this Sunday, so this should be temporary semi-protected again. Nickag989talk 20:06, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Amortias (T)(C) 22:10, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Cuck

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – redirect vandalism . WNYY98 (talk) 20:10, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Hut 8.5 21:48, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Giants (Take That song)

    Semi-protection: Continued disruptive IP edits. Ss112 20:25, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Hardcore punk

    Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Statik N (talk) 20:30, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Serbian Air Force and Air Defence

    Semi-protection: Second time to have protected - Continued disruptive IP edits/vandalism. FOX 52 (talk) 20:32, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Pančić's Peak

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Sock puppet attack and dispute in progres. User is under SPI and probably using socks to further revert article. Protect it for 7 or 10 days, it will be enough. Ąnαșταη (ταlκ) 20:53, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Anastan, please do not characterize a content dispute as vandalism. NeilN talk to me 21:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Auli'i Cravalho

    Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Lots of new anon IP editors flooding this article. Need temporary protection to get things back under control. McDoobAU93 20:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. NeilN talk to me 21:48, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Immigration and crime

    Full-protection: Persistent edit warring while discussion is ongoing, in what was a stable article. It would be helpful to stop the back and forth until it's resolved on talk. James J. Lambden (talk) 21:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    The user above is unwilling and incapable of discussing the merit of the content in this article. The pursuit for full protection is an attempt to keep a version of the article that the user prefers, even as two other regular users on the article have comprehensively rebutted the editor above on the talk page. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    That is a bad-faith misrepresentation. If it has any bearing on the outcome, please review the ongoing talk page discussions and draw your own conclusions:
    James J. Lambden (talk) 21:40, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. @Snooganssnoogans and James J. Lambden: It was a close call between blocking you both or protecting the article. I have reverted back to the stable version and protected. Snooganssnoogans, you should know you need to work towards consensus for changes, especially ones that touch upon DS areas. NeilN talk to me 21:46, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I have discussed the content with the individual above for a number of days. The user's reasons for excluding the accurate, reliably sourced and due content repeatedly shift in the talk, with the user ending up setting thresholds for inclusion that don't reflect Wiki policy and if the user truly believed in them would lead to the exclusion of all content in the article. Can one user keep out content from an article without providing principled and well-reasoned reasons for doing so? What is the next logical step to take to settle this? I'm not familiar with dispute settlement protocols. On more active pages, other users usually take the appropriate actions. This article is unfortunately not active enough to have more seasoned editors. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 21:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @NeilN: Understood. @Snooganssnoogans: Please don't misrepresent my arguments here. Let's continue this discussion on the article's talk page. James J. Lambden (talk) 22:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @Snooganssnoogans: Please look at WP:DRR for some options. --NeilN talk to me 22:12, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. I started a RfC. I just hope it isn't malformed. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 22:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Will Turner

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. ★Trekker (talk) 21:10, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. For 24 hours. El_C 22:08, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Conservatism

    Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – See the page history. ∼∼∼∼ Eric0928Talk 21:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. NeilN talk to me 21:53, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Forest School, Walthamstow

    Temporary semiprotection. Under attack from IP editors. CityOfSilver 21:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. NeilN talk to me 21:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Category:Final Fight characters

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Fangusu. Grayfell (talk) 22:47, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

    Temporary semiprotection. High susceptibility from trolls regarding spoilers, due to imminent release date and leak of one of the versions of the game. One month of protection from non-registered users would be appreciated, I am sure. · AarnKrry · 22:52, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

    Get Out (film)

    Temporary semi-protection. High level of IP disruption, removal of sourced content and POV changes.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Matt Hardy

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant Vandalism . MatthewTardiff 23:09, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

    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.

    Oppam

    Pending changes: I would like to expand the article constructively. So if you could change the protection level to Pending changes, I will appreciate that. 2405:204:D305:C9FE:3145:4525:6B4D:75A3 (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    • Oppose. In fact, I've upped the protection level. This article has been edited persistently by a sockmaster, including through semi-protection, so ECP is necessary. It's somewhat suspicious that this request was made three hours after the latest sock was blocked. ~ Rob13Talk 18:29, 27 February 2017 (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.

    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=767785684"