Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Miguel.mateo (talk | contribs) at 05:54, 16 June 2008 (→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 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.

    semi-protect. Extremely high level of IP vandalism. There is a current discussion about one particular item in this page and a Cabal is being discussed. IPs are changing the content of the article at random due to this discussion. Until the discussion is settled, we would like to get this article protected. Miguel.mateo (talk) 05:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection. Over last twelve hours the page has been edited a few times by a new IP-editor, adding information about a future season which hasn't officially been confirmed, and where the transclusion of the episode tables from season articles is being replaced by copy-pastes of the season articles. I'm also half-way towards a 3RR block. Same IP has also changed episode numbers at Degrassi: The Next Generation (season 1) and Degrassi: The Next Generation (season 2), but this (at the moment) is not a big deal. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 05:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Page was protected from early may to june and then today the user who had been vandalizing the page for the last year and a half returned and continued his campaign of vandalism. Worse they undid 15 edits I had made as part of a personal vendetta against me. I ask that the page be protected for a good length of time because barring any major newsworthy event, the article is mature in terms of content with nothing else to really add. Boston2austin (talk) 05:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. There have been 170ish edits over the past week from IP-based editors who have added unconfirmed topics not discussed in the official VH1 Press Release. Instead of listing the official, confirmed topics, the page has degraded to a general list of virtually every pop-culture event since 2000 including many that occurred this year (There is no 2008 episode). By semi-protecting, at least until the episodes are aired, the inaccurate spam should be contained. I am reverting the article back to feature only the official topics mentioned and hope that a semi-protect will keep the page that way. Toadwildride (talk) 05:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary full protection Dispute, There is currently an edit war going on regards to history content. Would like to prevent anyone from getting blocked because of 3RR violations, talk page is being used..Grey Wanderer | Talk 01:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Declined Not yet. No edits to mainspace today. If dispute heats up and resolution measures (talk page, WP:DR, WP:3O, etc) don't work, bring back here for re-eval. Tan | 39 01:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism as part of a harassment campaign. Targetted for deletion as a result of same vandalism.

      Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Tan | 39 01:34, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protect the redirect. The article was a redirect for the past 11 months until an IP restored it yesterday. It was speedy-redirected in the following AfD (I closed it as such after three redirect !votes), but IPs keep restoring the article. – sgeureka t•c 23:55, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Semi-protected for one week. Tan | 39 23:58, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism by new I.P. consist to previous vandal edits ♣ẼгíćЏ89♣ (talk) 23:45, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Semi-protected for one day. Bring back if it continues. Tan | 39 23:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. IPs are constantly adding an unsourced and poorly written paragraph that is pointless to the article and everytime I delete it, they write it again. Rvk41 (talk) 23:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Appears only one IP is making the edits, and there has been no attempt at a resolution via talk page discussion. Tan | 39 23:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for unprotection

    Shortcuts

    Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at 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.

    This person has charted on billboards. The page is deleted, plus it is blocked from anyone re-creating it. here's proof that it's on the Billboards here Y5nthon5a (talk) 03:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I see the deletion log says that it was copied from the page, I believe. I will write a short description of her when this page is unblocked. Thanks. Y5nthon5a (talk) 03:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      Unprotected Confirmed charted hit; meets WP:MUSIC. Tan | 39 04:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    This articel is protected for no reason at all ("View logs for this page" is completely empty). 68.39.174.238 (talk) 02:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    This page is protected and I have no idea why. It's completely unlike Wikipedia to have an article that's protected so it can't even be made at all and I strongly advocate against this behavior. I can understand if there was a prior issue but this does not mean the page shouldn't be allowed to exist at all. I would very much like to write a brief description of this artist, who, with 381,000 Google hits, is clearly notable, and I am upset that it is currently not permitted. Request immediate unprotection. DigitalSorcerer (talk) 03:35, 16 June 2008 (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.

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    Semi-protection. Repeated addition of a certain (probably non-notable) Tamil language film for which we have no source of a relationship to that article. (Although, one logged in user has chimed in, so this may not help.) — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:19, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Semi-protected for a period of 48 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protection. BLP violations due to some comments by the subject on his radio show. IPs and other users are adding unsourced/poorly sourced material. Subject is supposedly going to address issue on tomorrow's show, so just 24 hours of protection is needed (hopefully). ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:59, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Fully protected for one day. Tan | 39 22:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I've reduced this to semi-protection, with the reason that the edits are coming from IPs and not from established users. At the moment, there is no pressing need to block the article to everyone. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I will again defer to you, Peter, but I had counted two registered user edits on this issue, two from established users here and here. There were some others from registered but admittedly not established users. Given the highly visible and advertised nature of this article/issue, I fp'd for a day. Mea culpa... Tan | 39 22:13, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    And again. Peter, can you reconsider your trumping of my protection? Tan | 39 22:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with Tan - several additions for this unsourced material, including the latest, have come from registered users. Full protection would be more helpful. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Darn, I'd just written a long essay about why I made my decision. :) Yep, completely agree; I wanted to see if the registered users would back off, but clearly they aren't going to, so full-protection re-established. Tan, I wasn't trumping it; I just wanted to see how semi-protection would go, as that's where most of the material came from. I trust your judgement completely; I didn't mean to give you the impression that I didn't. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary semi-protect Repeated addition of "data" sourced only by YouTube videos. If the person in the video could be identified, it would, additionally be WP:BLP. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:54, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:55, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protect Edit warring by multiple registered editors even while discussion is going on. --Ave Caesar (talk) 21:35, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Fully protected PeterSymonds (talk) 21:57, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, This article has undergone quite a bit of vandalism lately by anon/new editors..D-Day (talk) 21:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Tan | 39 21:57, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protect Over the last month there has been repeated vandalism of this article by IPs (likely to be sockpuppets) that insert derogatory text, nonsense, and errors; see for instance [1]. --Bonadea (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:46, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Requesting unprotect, it was deleted & protected without giving appropriate time to develop the article, there is article in http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Jenkees that cannot be translated even if someone wanted to.

    Otherwise you should delete the nl-wikipedia article also if it doesn't meet the requirements for article.

      Declined Please draft a copy of your intended article in your userspace, using a subpage (i.e. User:Username/Ronald Jenkees). There you will have the time to develop your article, and if deemed adequate for inclusion, will be moved to the mainspace at your request. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:31, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    User talk:Count Magnus Lee (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    temporary full protection Vandalism, Blocked user making changes to other people's comments on their talk page.roleplayer 17:41, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Already protected. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:22, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Repeated mass vandalism of article content by multiple users. -- Kendrick7talk 16:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Semi-protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. If it wasn't for the spurt of WP:BLP infringement vandalism and personal attacks, I would not have protected it. Let's see how it goes after this cool-off period. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    For many days now, anonymous editors have been adding "librarians are hiding something," or words to that effect, to this article. The edits are regularly reverted. IMHO much trouble would be saved if anons couldn't edit the article. Lou Sander (talk) 16:35, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:24, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. More or less endless reverting of InfoBox going on. Page was semi-protected recently but only for one week. As soon as prot was lifted, same issue occurred. Setwisohi (talk) 16:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism, including blanking the page, randomly deleting the references and categories, and making malicious edits. --SWJS: The All Knowing Destroy All Humans! Nerd(Cortex Scan) 18:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:27, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    79.66.164.190 (talk) 17:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)unprotection79.66.164.190 (talk) 17:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Please provide a reason why we should unprotect this page. Hut 8.5 17:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      Declined It was protected because of defamatory BLP infringements and high levels of vandalism. I'd suggest a month before trying unprotection. 79, if you wish to make edits, please direct your requests to the article's talk page. Alternatively, please create an account, and after four days and ten edits, you will be able to edit semi-protected pages yourself. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    unprotection , No edits since March .Mww113 (talk) 14:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Declined because of its high visibility. Please make appropriate edit requests using {{editprotected}} on the template's talk page. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protect. Entire article removed maliciously. 79.66.164.190 (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

      Declined this is the wrong forum. If you want to contest the deletion of this page, please contact the deleting admin at User talk:Master of Puppets or go to deletion review. Page protection will do nothing. Hut 8.5 17:33, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=219643714"