Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 78.2.236.99 (talk) at 19:43, 28 April 2024 (→Siege of Szigetvár: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcuts

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.

Requests for page protection

You are currently viewing the subpage "Current requests for increase in protection level".
Return to Requests for page protection.

Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level

Shivaji

Reason: Disruptive editing on the title of Shivaji, without discussing it on the talk page. Frequent edit warring and suspecting meatpuppetry. Imperial[AFCND] 10:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been under indefinite semi-protection for about five years now. It does not appear to me that going to ECP would make much of a difference as many contributors already have that user right. The only thing I could imagine doing that could force more talk page discussion would be imposing 1RR. Would you be amenable to that? (I have put a long-overdue CTOPS notice on the talk page). Daniel Case (talk) 20:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a strong opinion, but looking at edits from the last 2 weeks, 3 out of 8 users involved in the dispute over titles are not EC so ECP probably would improve the situation over the long run. I suspect that even if EC editors reach consensus, the title dispute will continue. Perhaps full protection for a week or two followed by indefinite ECP? Daniel Quinlan (talk) 22:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like imposing full protection when it's not been requested; that solution also requires setting the watchlist ping to come back and reimpose the indef. And any ECP would not have a "long run" effect since the three editors excluded would likely work to increase their edit counts, PGAME or not, to the point that they could edit the page again (Some day we will have the authority and ability to make page-specific user access level revocations ...).

1RR is frankly to me the best long-term solution here, but I'd still like to hear from the requester. So, @ImperialAficionado:, any thoughts here? Daniel Case (talk) 18:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine Emergency Law

Extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – WP:ARPBIA. Filmssssssssssss (talk) 13:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked: Falasteez (talk · contribs) blocked by Smalljim. Favonian (talk) 16:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nikola IV Zrinski

Reason: High level of IP vandalism Miki Filigranski (talk) 14:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Will also log at CTOPS under ARBEE. Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Daniel Case I agree that sometimes the page needs to be protected, but I'm not a vandal, as Miki Filigranski likes to say. Please see my edits, you don't have to protect the page for me, I'm just improving Wikipedia and warning about Wikipedia's rules. Miki Filigranski reported it on purpose so that when you protect the page, he can do what he wants and return unverified and unknown authors of pictures, and I cannot edit. That's very sneaky of him. Please see my edits to those two pages, I don't think I did anything wrong. And now he will get his back because you have now protected the page, and that is his insidious goal. Very distasteful from that user. So you know what kind of Wikipedia user it is. 78.2.236.99 (talk) 19:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Szigetvár

Reason: High level of IP vandalism Miki Filigranski (talk) 14:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that sometimes the page needs to be protected, but I'm not a vandal, as Miki Filigranski likes to say. Please see my edits, you don't have to protect the page for me, I'm just improving Wikipedia and warning about Wikipedia's rules. Miki Filigranski reported it on purpose so that when you protect the page, he can do what he wants and return unverified and unknown authors of pictures, and I cannot edit. That's very sneaky of him. Please see my edits to those two pages, I don't think I did anything wrong. And now he will get his back because you have now protected the page, and that is his insidious goal. Very distasteful from that user. So you know what kind of Wikipedia user it is. 78.2.236.99 (talk) 19:43, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ANTV, tvOne (Indonesian TV network) and RTV (Indonesian TV network)

Reason: High level of IP vandalism, especially those vandalized by sockpuppet of LOCK177 223.255.224.104 (talk) 15:51, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Bbb23 (talk) 16:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mikel Arteta

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There've been at least a few vandalism attempts a week from unregistered users for a while on here now, with very little constructive being done. > Asheiou (they/them • talk) 17:32, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Corey Harrison

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Continued recent BLP vio's. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhramanam

Reason: High level of IP vandalism. Santhosh Thomas304 (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shiju Abdul Rasheed

Reason: High level of IP vandalism. Santhosh Thomas304 (talk) 18:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Increase&oldid=1221248447"