Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PoolGuy (talk | contribs) at 04:09, 24 June 2006 (→Current requests for unprotection: GoldToeMarionette - restoring request that was removed before I could respond to a valid question.). 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.

    Full protection - Once again, {{deletedpage}} without protection means nothing. 69.117.4.132 01:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Protected by Voice of All. Kimchi.sg 02:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi protection requested. A dynamic AOL IP keeps vandalizing Ideogram's userpage. Reporting the user at AIV would be futile as they make one edit and then wait for the IP to change. Usually only about one or two edits of the userpage per day, but hurtful and offensive nonetheless. Cowman109Talk 20:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected due to recurring userpage vandalism. Voice-of-All 02:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I would like to make a request for some sort of mediation/page protection at the FC Barcelona article. The issue is basicly about article size. In order to keep the article within Wikipedia guidelines on length, several other articles have been created and are linked together in Category:FC Barcelona. However an anonymous editor has ignored my suggestions to add contributions to other articles rather then the main article. He has persistently overloaded the page with info that is included in other articles and refuses to engage in any debate or log-in. --Djln --Djln 20:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected due to revert warring. Voice-of-All 02:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Full-protect - This page is in a content dispute that I am currently trying to mediate as part of the mediation cabal. Currenly the article has undergone many edits, but each has been reverted by other parties... essentially the article is in the same condition as it was last week. I want to focus attention to the talk page. Agian thanks Eagle talk 04:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. For now, be sure to use descriptive edit summaries and discuss edits on talk. Voice-of-All 02:06, 24 June 2006 (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.

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

    Please unprotect User:GoldToeMarionette's talk page since the RfAr concerning the account validated that no policy violation occurred which warranted the block or page protection in the first place [1]. Thank you. PoolGuy 03:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm a little uncertain about this. Why are you asking for the talk page of an indefinitely blocked user to be unprotected? -- Samir धर्म 05:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Samir, the account was inappropriately blocked. The above linked RfAr just closed and confirmed that to be the case. I am also requesting the account to be unblocked, but can't do it on the user talk page because it is protected. This request was removed last night by Admin pgk who is pursuing me and can't accept the result of the RfAr because it proved his falsehoods wrong. I am sorry he removed it before I had a chance to respond to your inquiry. I would be happy to answer more questions, but it should be clear in the RfAr under my evidence. Thanks for taking the time to look at this. It is appreciated. PoolGuy 04:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    Unprotect - no discussion for some time on talk pages. Related articles have been unprotected. fullsome prison 16:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for significant 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.

    Just zis Guy you know? have deleted content and made unauthorized changes to my user page. After this he protected the page so I cannot undo his changes. I see this as a clear violation of user page guidelines. I therefore request that the page should be unprotected. --Rdos 06:38, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Still under discussion on the user talk page. I've reviewed deleted edits and see this as a clear example of what a user page is WP:NOT. I've not unprotected but am leaving the request up -- Samir धर्म 08:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you be a little more specific? --Rdos 08:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay. You shouldn't use a user page for a treatise on why autism is related to cross-breeding with Neanderthals. Bring it up at WP:ANI if you want further intervention -- Samir धर्म 09:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Please note that there is no such thing as an "unauthorized change" to a Wikipedia page. I asked nicely, then I asked firmly, then I removed the offending content, and you still would't take the hint. This is a personal essay which is offensive to some editors and has absolutely no place on Wikipedia. Take it to your own website. I've not stopped you including the link to that. Just zis Guy you know? 11:40, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    As far as I'm concerned this issue is no longer about whatever the stuff belongs on my userpage or not. It is your conduct as an admin that is turning me off. --Rdos 17:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Fullfilled/denied requests

    Semi-protection: It's currently being vandalized three to four times a day to express the sentiment of the non-existance of the Arabian Gulf. In the past, I've found that protecting the article for a week or so will stop the vandalism for about four months. --Carnildo 17:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Voice-of-All 02:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    Partial-protect - Having persistent problems with an anon IP (205.188.116.201) that comes from a cafeteria in Iowa. Refuses to let any edits but their own persist in the article, refuses to sign in, and refuses to discuss changes on the talk page. אמר Steve Caruso (poll) 13:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Pages are not protected to deal with a single user. I suggest bringing this to WP:AIV if it is a simple vandalism issue, or WP:RFI or WP:ANI if it is not. --Lord Deskana Dark Lord of YOUR OPINIONS 14:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, will do :-) אמר Steve Caruso (poll) 14:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


    Full protection. Cool down period seems necessary for ongoing edit war. 202.156.6.54 13:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Protected, I'm uncertain if anons can make requests here, but it looks like the article needs a short cool off period from editing to discuss changes -- Samir धर्म 06:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Why can't they, if they can assess the need for (un-)protection accurately? Kimchi.sg 13:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect - A large number of anon editors continue to add a made up name to one of the characters listed on the page, despite the fact that it has been clearly confirmed as being fake. I've already reverted it far more than I should have (3RR and then some, though I'm not sure if that obvious vandalism stipulation applies, block if necessary), since I'm one of the few registered contributors to the article, and would prefer not to have to continue doing so until Sunday, when the real name can be confirmed. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 04:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I've asked for more information on the reversion in question on Talk:Omnitrix -- Samir धर्म 05:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    And sprotected based on that information -- Samir धर्म 06:23, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect IP addresses enjoy coming in and vandalizing and/or changing the genre when the genre has already been properly decided upon on the talk page. --emc! ╬ (t a l k) 21:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Protected for dispute on genre of MCR. Notice placed on Talk:My Chemical Romance to discuss this before unprotection. -- Samir धर्म 06:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect - This page is a biography of a living wealthy person. Multiple edits from IP users in the past few days have added libelous and childish obscenity vandalism. Curtains99 01:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks like they've stopped x 6 hours. Should sprotect only if they restart. -- Samir धर्म 05:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect - The page is commonly vandalized. There have been 7 vandalizations in the last 24 hours from 4 IPs, and that is fairly typical of a day in the life of this article. I'm not sure what level of vandalism you think is justifiable for protection, but there's a good amount of it on a daily basis. TheHYPO 23:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Looked through. Don't see enough activity yet, but please alert if it picks up. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 06:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protect Despite that it is a disambiguation page, it is commonly vandalized by IP addresses and new users. --emc! ╬ (t a l k) 21:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    There is not enough activity/vandalism on the page to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist the page and revert as necessary. Kimchi.sg 21:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you kidding me? That's a joke, right? The only activity on the page itself is that of vandalism, despite how often it takes place. --emc! ╬ (t a l k) 22:00, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    No joke. I concur with Kim. 1 edit in 3 days. No way near enough vandalism. It's not worth locking out IP addresses for. "Semi protection should be used when it is the only way to solve your problem". In this case, reverting is easy. --Lord Deskana Dark Lord of YOUR OPINIONS 22:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protect I requested before that this page be semi-protected, and it was (twice) for good cause, but since the semi-protection tag has been lifted, vandalism is starting again. --emc! ╬ (t a l k) 21:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I had a good look at the edit history and reviewed all the relevant contributions. EMC, I don't see a reason to fully protect right now. Please alert if the situation changes. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 06:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Second request, due to revert war casued by User:Fabshelly and several annoyomous IDs, inspired by article written by Koh [2] on wikipedia. Controversy is similar to those of Marty Meehan.

    User:Fabshelly has so far violated policies and guidelines in varying degrees: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, which is an official policy, ignorance of Wikipedia:Reliable sources, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons and Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view. If failing to abide by these laws despite being informed, it would be considered as Wikipedia:Vandalism. Although Fabshelly as so far made no signs of making these law-violating edits, other ID users such as this [3] have made attempts.

    As for me, while Fabshelly has accused me of posting false information on Talk:Bae Yong Joon, I have already patched up by adding essential citations to my contributions in accordance to the standardised guideline of Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Thus there should be no more reason to why my contributions be eliminated repeatedly despite abiding all the above laws in Good Faith.

    Thus semi-protection, as least temporary, is needed to end the revert war caused by violations of wikipedia laws. Wikipedia's guidelines, especially Official policies, are something which all users must abide with in order to be in wikipedia. I hereby appeal to admins to at least seriously consider this request and thoroughly investigate and end this contention. Mr Tan 07:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you Mr Tan for bringing it up for discussion on the talk page. There's not enough activity for sprotection now, but please alert if there is a further need. -- Samir धर्म 06:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Reviewed after IP made spurious edits today (removing names of parents, sister, contributions) similar to other edits made on page. Sprotected -- Samir धर्म 08:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    We have a IP and a editor adding a fancruft Robin to the page and they keep reverting it back when we revert it back. The Robin that they are reverting it to is currently up for AfD as original research The Robin. BJK 23:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks like we got the people to stop remove request. BJK 13:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Okay. Also nothing x 48 hours -- Samir धर्म 05:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Please unprotect User:GoldToeMarionette's talk page since the RfAr concerning the account validated that no policy violation occurred which warranted the block or page protection in the first place [4]. Thank you. PoolGuy 03:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm a little uncertain about this. Why are you asking for the talk page of an indefinitely blocked user to be unprotected? -- Samir धर्म 05:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    See further down where he makes the same request, he is being disruptive. --pgk(talk) 07:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    A vote is being held on the talk page, so it's unlikely that there will be any more edit wars on the main page. Plus, I would like to add content to the page. --JDtalkemail 17:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    article unprotected by User:Pilotguy on 16:23, 22 June 2006 -- Samir धर्म 05:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Page was originally semi-protected due to an invasion from the IGN message boards. This was over a week ago and the invasion was only going to last an evening anyway. Anonymous editors are currently requesting (constructive) changes on the talk page. -- Steel 00:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected. Looks like the "attacks" mentioned on the talk page have already stopped. Kimchi.sg 22:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotection - the dispute has been settled.Dev920 15:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    Article was unprotected by User:Xaosflux on 20:51, 21 June 2006 -- Samir धर्म 05:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=60286451"