Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 72.179.45.108 (talk) at 16:33, 24 January 2009 (→Current requests for protection). 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.

    semi-protect. Vandalism and content blanking from SPA Pbn skd and ip sockpuppet [1] over the course of several days since Jan 19th.72.179.45.108 (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism, add unsourced materiel, rumor, request protect for one week or after 2 February. Matthew_hk tc 16:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection, Sock editing. WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Nangparbat .EdJohnston (talk) 16:13, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. Sorry for unnecessary request, hit the wrong button in Twinkle. EdJohnston (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection, repeated on-going vandalism. Timeshift (talk) 15:13, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 16:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection, Following the ex-officio (and only rumoured, though it has been internally announced) departure of the Headmaster under a cloud, a bed of gossiping has taken hold of the page. Until a reliable open source comes out, I think the article should be semi- or full-protected..╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 14:57, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 16:08, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Since the possibility of this guy buying Liverpool football club, the IP vandals have started hitting this page. A short lock-off should help.--Ged UK (talk) 14:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 14:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection vandalism, Colbert-esque vandalism.Sceptre (talk) 13:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 13:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Create protection. The differently capitalized Greg Prato has already been salted, but this variant has also been created and speedied four times.  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 12:43, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 12:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection - High levels of IP vandalism in past half an hour. Jpeeling (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 11:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection - continued removal of sourced material by IPs.--Kotniski (talk) 09:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. The main problematic IP was blocked. Otherwise there's not much other activity to justify protection at this time. Feel free to report again if it gets worse. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection - IP vandalism which has gone unnoticed by admins. D.M.N. (talk) 09:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, persistent vandalism by IPs in the range 212.138.x.y.–Capricorn42 (talk) 06:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. That should take care of it. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection Anonymous IP continues to revert other peoples' changes back to its own version. The IP continues to replace a trivia section when it is removed and removes {trivia} tags. I think this article will only need to be locked for 2-3 weeks at most, because Andrei_Arlovski, the subject of the article has a fight on (I believe) the 24th, and the hype should die down after that. Paulish (talk) 05:11, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined You're actually reverting his fixed typos as well. Decline page protection; try talking to the IP about the trivia on the their talk page. If the vandalism gets worse as a result of the event you mention, feel free to re-report. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary Semi-Protection Vandalism. There is excessive vandalism and unclassified edits on this page and its' sister pages. Bbhinton15 (talk) 02:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:31, 24 January 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.

    Unprotection, It's currently indefinitely semiprotected. I think that is unnecessary. Even when it was unprotected, it wasn't heavily vandalized. And, there is at least one editor who consistently edits it so we know it's being watched. Gary King (talk) 04:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected Kanonkas :  Talk  04:28, 24 January 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

    Any length of protection considerable amounts of vandalism. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:26, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of two weeks. Tiptoety talk 05:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-Protected Anonymous IP's adding in unsourced info that is not matching either reference marks in the article itself, nor other offline sources. Also this edit is identified as made from a problem IP as a example of other IP's with history of disruptive edits editing the article. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 03:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Happyme22 (talk) 03:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, resurgence of high levels of endemic ip-vandalism: both current and past.ChyranandChloe (talk) ChyranandChloe (talk) 03:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck ° resolves to be more caknuck-y 03:38, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, high levels of former and current ip-vandalism; some ip users are involved in the revert; no active constructive activity.ChyranandChloe (talk) 03:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck ° resolves to be more caknuck-y 03:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Request semi-protection for {{Michelle McManus}} due to repeated IP and new-user suspected socks of banned editor. Same rationale for existing semi-protection of Michelle McManus. Recommend same expiration as article. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. - If it gets worse, relist your request. Tiptoety talk 01:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Total vandal target..Jonathan321 (talk) 01:26, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of three days. Tiptoety talk 01:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Lots of recent IP vandalism..Jonathan321 (talk) 01:05, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week. Tiptoety talk 01:08, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection; one week, plenty of vandalism and unsourced speculation since the page was unprotected, cheers.BanRay 22:46, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Long-term protection is needed per the log. PeterSymonds (talk) 00:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    User talk:70.153.243.39 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    temporary semi-protection Trolling by blocked user. Cunard (talk) 22:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Done — Aitias // discussion 22:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Used on many pages (transclusion). Possible target of vandalism..--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 22:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Also, pages are only protected pre-emptively if they were used on a high number of pages. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    What is a "high number"? More than 30 pages?--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 22:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    About 40 to justify semi. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Man, please, I hoped to get them through in one try. Shall I really come back next week after reaching 40? ;-) --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 22:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Done Actually I had a think about it and there's no harm with granting this request. The only need for an edit to the local version would be to re-upload, which can only be done by autoconfirmed users anyway. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:27, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 22:28, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Used on many pages (transclusion). Possible target of vandalism..--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 22:12, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Highly-transcluded image. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Used on many pages (transclusion). Possible target of vandalism..--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord2 22:12, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Also note that these are Commons images, so the protection is just for editing the page itself (relatively common for these types of images). PeterSymonds (talk) 22:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Unprotection, Article is falsely protected due to the claim of 'repeated recreation' While the log does show this was the case, it has been over two years since the rash of recreation/deletes. Over the past year and a half the page was recreated with citations and removal of all WP:OR and other policy violating facts. During this past year and a half the page has not been deleted or recreated. Saying one recreation in almost two years repeat, is a stretch. The policy says Non-existent pages may be protected, for limited periods of time, if they are repeatedly re-created after deletion in line with the deletion policy. Neither of these conditions are true. The page has been indef blocked (violation one) without any recreations occurring (violating two). Q T C 03:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, Actually, the last recreation was in December 2008, as the AfD shows. This means that any recreation (at least for the next time) should first require deletion review and if review was successful, it would overturn the protection anyway. No reason to unSALT at the moment. The protection policy speaks of repeated recreation after deletion - it does not say that this repeated recreation has to occur in a short time. SoWhy 09:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary semi-protection vandalism. Lots and lots of vandalism lately, almost all of it by anons with the occasional new editor. A number of editors are dutifully watching and reverting, but maybe some of them would like a breather. Thanks. Arxiloxos (talk) 22:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Odd amount of vandalism. I'm presuming he's in the news or something, but one week should cover it. If not, feel free to report again after expiry. Thanks. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, How come this isn't already protected? Seems like this page has a target on its back for vandals to shoot at..Jonathan321 (talk) 21:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.
    Because it's not a vandalism target, at least not at the moment. SoWhy 22:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=266134817"