Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 205.220.215.1 (talk) at 03:57, 7 May 2021 (→Various NYC Subway Articles). 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 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.

    Various NYC Subway Articles

    Extended protection: Persistent/continuous vandalism by Rgalo socks - semi-protection and pending changes are not enough for these 3 particular articles. Mtattrain (talk) 15:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Applies to the two talk pages. MelanieN (talk) 22:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    User(s) blocked. Refers to the "C" page. Latest sock has been blocked. Before that there was a lot of productive editing by IPs, suggesting that protection would cause more collateral damage than it would help. MelanieN (talk) 22:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]



    <img src="https://64.media.tumblr.com/b4f76971df7b36d05f3ac840e2283b56/tumblr_mv6sekJLmn1qcvqsto2_250.gif" height="45px" width="45px"></img>This User's Favorite Doctor Is 10

    Sham Ennessim

    Full protection: Persistent long-term, and short-term, edit warring from the user Zack439; from looking at the edit history, it seems that the user intends to continue reverting other editors indefinitely, without seeking talk page consensus, as the user was directed to do. 197.38.46.131 (talk) 15:17, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Full is overkill, Way overkill. ECP would do as he has only 145 edits. DXLBandLokiBlaster 16:58, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually a block would do better. A topic ban more of a say then a full block. Unless he done it to other places. DXLBandLokiBlaster 17:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Edit warring should go to the edit warring noticeboard. But it looks as if the editor has ceased. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:36, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't believe the user has ceased at all, based on the edit history pattern. I requested page protection because I believe at this point talk page consensus should be a requirement for edits, since the user is replacing the entire content of the page; and requested full protection in particular so that the user doesn't get a future privilege. 197.38.46.131 (talk) 01:26, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    As expected, the user started to revert again. 197.38.46.131 (talk) 03:29, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Edens Zero

    Semi-protection: Persistent reversions from IP user over episode title punctuation. User:SubZeroSilver (talk) 19:11, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. MelanieN (talk) 22:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Patrick M. Byrne

    Semi-protection for maybe 6 months? Under-watched and long-time problematic article (involved in the Mantanmoreland thing, for those like me who have been here way too long). A Big Lie proponent who has just launched a website supporting the Arizona QAnon "recount", recent history of drive-by IPs whitewashing and boosting. I think this is a bit of a ticking bomb right now. Guy (help! - typo?) 20:58, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Marvel Cinematic Universe

    Extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Frequent WP:EDITWARRING despite repeated warnings to both users concerned. Neither editor seems interested in resolving their WP:CONTENTDISPUTE through consensus despite repeated attempts by third parties, and extended confirmed protection seems the only way to solve the issue. IronManCap (talk) 21:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks like it needs to be temporary full protection instead because not only Newtlamender has been conducting edit warring, but also many ECP users also doing same. The discussion already began in ANEW and let see whether Newtlamender is blocked or not because of the behavior. 110.137.163.125 (talk) 21:19, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment: I feel it is slowed down on the article page...and I don’t think the editor knew the guidelines until I linked it. Hopefully it can be resolved soon enough then without need of protecting. Jhenderson 777 21:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Rúben Dias

    Semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Persistent addition of uncited NPOV violations by IPs and new users. Tommi1986 let's talk! 21:15, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Trail of Tears

    Indefinite semi-protection: this page is currently under pending changes protection, but it's proven to be absolutely useless-- this page is still vandalised by new users and IPs on a regular basis. Trust me, it needs semi. HelenDegenerate (talk) 23:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Encanto (film)

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent disruptive editing. Someone keeps saying it's traditional animated with no source. Crboyer (talk) 23:14, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Ottoman–Persian War (1775–1776)

    Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – LTA. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KızılBörü1071. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:53, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    The Masked Singer (American season 4)

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism/ disruptive editing from IPs. Magitroopa (talk) 00:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. For disruption from a single user or small range, blocking is preferable to protection. OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:01, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection high level of IP vandalism directed in removing anything about the massacre. 185.81.81.236 (talk) 00:29, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Small Doctor

    Temporary extended confirmed protection: BLP policy violations – Multiple IPs consistently inserting false information and removing content. Mumbaguh (talk) 01:07, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Ng Yat Chung

    Temporary Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Due to recent news event regarding Ng's behaviour during a press conference, multiple IPs are vandalising his page. Requesting protection for 24~48 hoursJustanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Sana Javed

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – This page has had a string of disruptive edits, so much so that it has been temporarily protected in the past to no avail. Finding information on the subject of this article is relatively difficult as it is but with persistent vandals and disruptions this article will continue to be in poor condition. Requesting indefinite semi-protection as temporary protection did not help the problem, and a lot of the vandalism seems to be coming from random IP users. ➤ Zᴇᴇx.ʀɪᴄᴇ ✪ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 01:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    War

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Almost immediate vandalism started after protection expired. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 02:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    P-pop

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – New vandalism over the past few days that is persistent and kind of suspicious. Note that this page has a very extensive history of vandalism by IPs and confirmed socks, such as User:Imsorry48, User:Jjangjang. palindrome§ǝɯoɹpuᴉןɐd 02:19, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    President

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent Vandalism. Srey Srostalk 02:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    L39ION of Los Angeles

    Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent vandalism. Benjamin112 (talk) 02:35, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    2021 Suez Canal obstruction

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term vandalism from a few IPs. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    IWI ACE

    Indefinite pending changes: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent addition of deliberate factual errors, which has not stopped after the last RPP expired. Loafiewa (talk) 03:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism from IP socks (172-series) including creating puppets such usernames like User:GarbageTrain56 and User:ConstructionTrain68 I believe he is a sockmaster of Diskys at User:Rgalo10. (User:Mtattrain) (talk) 19:48, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Mtattrain: The sockpuppets and sockmaster of Rgalo10 has been blocked indefinitely. 110.137.163.125 (talk) 00:53, 7 May 2021 (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]

    Halo 3

    Reason: The article was protected back in 2010, when protecting standards were far lower. I believe it's now ready to go unprotected, Cheers. 50.100.53.53 (talk) 04:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm willing to try unprotection after 14 years of indef protection, unless Courcelles objects. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think at this point you can assume he does not. Daniel Case (talk) 20:39, 10 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]

    Susan Wojcicki

    Reason: The page was protected due to BLP, and is still protected for that reason despite Susan dying in August. If the page is to stay protected, the protection reason should at least be changed. 100.7.34.111 (talk) 17:41, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Girls' Generation

    Unprotection: The group has been inactive for quite some time now I don't think semi is necessary. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 02:07, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Question: did you ask Deepfriedokra first as the bright red notice says? CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 05:41, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Romanization of Serbian

    Unprotection: @CambridgeBayWeather: The revert (as well as the move revert) was made by a sock... (see the edit request on article talk page too). Please mind fixing this?. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Siege of Buda (1686)

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KızılBörü1071, this is an LTA and will likely need extension. @CambridgeBayWeather: FYI since you don't seem to be aware of that. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:54, 6 May 2021 (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.
    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]
    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests

    Create a level 3 header with a link to the article in question, then a {{pagelinks}} template and then the reason.

    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=1021869999"