Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Beeblebrox (talk | contribs) at 19:30, 13 December 2009 (→{{la|List of heads of state and government by net worth}}: full1wk). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"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.

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

    Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. After release of 1-week semi-protection, same user started spamming again. Always uses different IP's so, would ask for only named users to be able to edit external links. Steguru (talk) 19:26, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:173.21.221.97 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection user talk of blocked user, Talk page abuse Diff. Long term IP vandal with a long history of vandalism and disruptive editing. Momo san Gespräch 05:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, again, it's just one lashing-out after blocking. Come back if it continues. tedder (talk) 05:19, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It's continuing again, just like the last time this user was blocked. Protection now please? --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 19:19, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    The thing is, he can remove anything but the blocking notice anytime he wants. There's no point in edit warring to keep the other templates up. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection dispute and vandalism There seems to be a bit of a conflict over adding the Ethiopian prime minister with a reasonable source. People also seem to use that as an excuse to vandalise. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 19:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Some of the edit warriors are autoconfirmed, locked down to try and force discussion. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:30, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection dispute, Dispute and edit warring over the section History which was added by user 79.103.211.188 (talk · contribs). Please remove the section and lock the article until the user provides scientific and/or academic sources to the information provided and a consensus is reached. Until then the disputed information can be placed on a work page. Note that the topic is sensitive and that the whole article has been deleted in the past due to similar conflicts, unreliable sources and plagiarism. Chech Explorer (talk) 18:31, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect for 10 more days. Please extend the current semi-protection of my own user talk page for an additional 10 days, because the situation appears not to have calmed down yet. Thank you. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cirt (talk) 17:27, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! --Tryptofish (talk) 17:54, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. BLP violation by an IP hopper. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 15:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cirt (talk) 16:11, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection dispute, Dispute and edit warring over small detail. Needs taking to talk page. magnius (talk) 15:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cirt (talk) 16:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection vandalism. —Farix (t | c) 14:27, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cirt (talk) 14:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection dispute, Content dispute between two editors, hopefully protection will encourage talk page discussion and/or move the parties along towards seeking out dispute resolution. . Cirt (talk) 14:19, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 17:11, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay thanks, will continue to monitor the situation. No worries, Cirt (talk) 17:26, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary full protection dispute, Content dispute involving multiple parties. Hopefully protection will encourage productive discussion on the talk page and/or dispute resolution. Cirt (talk) 14:04, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. --slakr\ talk / 18:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect. Anonymous editor in the 141.117..x.x range has been repeatedly adding defamatory, possible liable to the page, which is a biography of a living person. --Wayiran (talk) 13:05, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cirt (talk) 14:07, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect. User trolling his own talk page after being blocked. Jolly Ω Janner 12:45, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: There is an option available to administrators to block an editor from editing their talk page. --Addihockey10 13:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Fully protected. Cirt (talk) 14:06, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection of talk page. Seemed to have attracted some unwanted attention from an IP 86.159.70.117/86.180.59.163 who wants to drag me into dispute involving another editor. Has restored comments despite being asked not to. requesting 48 hours semi protection until they get bored and move on. Also could admin have a look at IPs contributions? At least one edit summary says another editor should be called for racism. Thanks GainLine ♠ ♥ 12:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cirt (talk) 14:05, 13 December 2009 (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.

    Protected April 1, 2009, due to vandalism following the March 2009 announcement that Encarta was to be discontinued. The editor who protected the page is no longer active. Thanks. 92.3.44.211 (talk) 12:52, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Rjd0060 (talk) 13:28, 12 December 2009 (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. Anonymous editor in the 195.229.x.x range is repeatedly making unattributed additions to the clan list in Marehan. User has not responded to talk page comments, perhaps because the IP changes every time (though I have also left comments at Talk:Marehan). User:CambridgeBayWeather's list is attributed; he and I have been reverting to his version. A week or two ago I caught myself making a 3RR at which point I opened an RfC at Category talk:Somali clans (to which CBW and I were the only participants). For more background, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Somalia#Clan lineage. I am the editor behind those initiatives, so I don't believe I should protect the page myself. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 09:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cirt (talk) 12:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Temporary full protection, IP vandalism + priority of characters changed by user who has gone around doing a this to multiple articles. 陣内Jinnai 07:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. tedder (talk) 07:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection vandalism countless times from anonymous IP addresses. South Bay (talk) 06:59, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. tedder (talk) 07:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Indefinite semi-protection excessive vandalism. Shortly after the article was unprotected the anonymous IP address vandalism returned. The trend of IP vandals returning to the page after semi-protection ends is continuing as it always has. This has happened after the other six times this article has been protected. Therefore, I believe it should be semi-protected indefinitely. If it isn't, this IP vandalism will continue as long as the article is unprotected. If not indefinitely, please semi-protect the article for a few months, at least. --Russ is the sex (talk) 06:34, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Escalating towards an indefinite protection. tedder (talk) 07:14, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:172.130.8.127 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection user talk of blocked user, Talk page abuse. Momo san Gespräch 06:00, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, only once, and not a personal attack. tedder (talk) 07:12, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:172.129.18.54 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection user talk of blocked user, Personal attack on blocking admin. Momo san Gespräch 05:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. tedder (talk) 07:11, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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

    semi-protection user talk of blocked user, Made legal threat in unblock request here. Momo san Gespräch 05:17, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. tedder (talk) 05:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection vandalism, Excessive IP vandalism especially in the past few days. Airplaneman talk 05:08, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. tedder (talk) 05:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection, Keith Bridgeman AKA General Tojo vandalism. Momo san Gespräch 04:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, only happened once. Revert and ignore, protect if it starts becoming a trend. tedder (talk) 04:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, IP continually removing part of the article with no edit explanation. The part being removed is a large part of the the Criticism section, possibly attempting to censor criticism of the church. I warned the IP on their talk page to stop attempting to censor the article, and they responded with "The issue was not whether or not the subject matter was contentious, the entire article is contentious. The issue was that the commentary there was misplaced. The first section is for an outline of the theology in question, and the excerpts we are discussing are more like criticism. There are quite lengthy sections that criticize the view already. Infact they make up the majority of the article even without the excerpts i had removed." Requesting protection due to the repeated edits in an attempt to change the POV to one that does not show the true criticism of the subject. Fbifriday (talk) 04:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. tedder (talk) 04:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection vandalism, Just about every edit made to this page since yesterday has either blanked the page or reverted such page blanking. . SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 04:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked.. If more socks show up, probably open an SPI case, or just ask me or another checkuser to take a look. J.delanoygabsadds 04:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Huge vandalism by IP editors. Ongoing and rapid-fire. --Manway (talk) 02:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 03:05, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Huge vandalism due to winning Hesiman Trophy about a half hour ago. Two weeks should be fine. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — ξxplicit 03:04, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Massive IP vandalism in the wake of the trophy being awarded. fuzzy510 (talk) 02:09, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — ξxplicit 02:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=331476858"