Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive/2012/11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2012

01 November 2012

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP's changing the age of the main character; although it's not a daily thing, it continually happens over time, and threatens the integrity of the article. This has been pointed out on the talk page, and is properly cited in the article. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 21:34, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| confabulate _ 22:14, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Pre-empting a BLP issue. Subject of article implicated in police inquiry. Article likely to attract a lot of edits and reverts due to current news activity. Suggest a semi protect to avoid ip activity as seen in the two Jimmy Saville pages - which are related to the current news interest. . isfutile:P (talk) 20:31, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. We typically don't preemptively protect articles, however in this case the vandalism has already started, so this is not preemption. ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 22:07, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-hopping vandalism edit war between multiple IPs. czar · · 20:27, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| converse _ 22:03, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-protection at least, possibly indefinite: Multiple IP Vandalism since August, including a few recent attempts close to the election. ShawnIsHere: Now in colors 21:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 21:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Nathan2055talk - contribs 21:02, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 21:17, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, high exposure due to being on main page. Should be protected until things die down. Dough4872 18:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Vandalism is still pretty weak, but I understand the increased sensitivity due to being on the main page. ‑Scottywong| express _ 21:42, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:09, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

User already blocked once but has now come back with a different IP. Semi-protection for a couple of weeks would see this person get bored and return to self abuse and knitting. --Biker Biker (talk) 20:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected – Steel 20:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Constant barrage of vandalism by multiple IPs. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:43, 1 November 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Semi-protected – Steel 20:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Repetitive disruptive edits from IP editor, apparently for partisan political reasons. Perhaps protected until the US election next Tuesday? --Lockley (talk) 19:19, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected – Steel 20:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. nableezy - 17:34, 1 November 2012 (UTC) 17:34, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Multiple IP vandalism. nableezy - 17:33, 1 November 2012 (UTC) 17:33, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. SMS Talk 14:41, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Will actively monitor situation. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 Requesting immediate archiving... ‑Scottywong| confer _ 22:00, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Kilopi (talk) 15:55, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 15:58, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I want to ban editing for this page for Unregistered user/Newly Registered user, Want to protect it from Vandalism. Greatuser (talk) 14:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:41, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
How was this even remotely within policy? The grounds for requesting protection were completely spurious. There was no persistent vandalism, and indeed no vandalism at all. According to the protection policy, "semi-protection should not be used as a preemptive measure against vandalism that has not yet occurred" (emphasis in original), and furthermore "user pages and subpages are sometimes protected at the user's request if there is evidence of vandalism/disruption" (emphasis mine). The user had been forum-shopping their baseless request for protection here and to at least two different administrators; it had always been declined before so it mystifies me why it was granted now. —Psychonaut (talk) 14:53, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined I stand corrected. I was under the impression that userspace pages could be protected at the user's request regardless of any reason. I was also unaware of previous declines. (I suppose I should have known to check given the requester's other edits....) Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:17, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent unconstructive edits by IP users. SMS Talk 13:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 16:00, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Hi, this page lists various participants name, and was created just to make people aware that even they can edit pages. This was done as a part of the upcoming workshop in Mumbai, this weekend. Since, we can not occupy many at the venue, we have put the notice that registrations has been closed. Thus, would like to request semi protection till November 4. Thanks!. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 08:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined - semiprotection generally isn't used for this sort of thing - rather than simply block their ability to edit the page, it would probably be better to put a notice about the situation in an obvious place and let people who sign up know about what is going on. AlexiusHoratius 16:03, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Frequent IP vandalism.Rangoon11 (talk) 03:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  13:22, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Incessant date-changing (vandalism, not GF edits) from slightly different IPs. A range block might be another option. Rivertorch (talk) 12:10, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. George Ho (talk) 08:20, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Numerous IP address (with wildly different gelocations) repeatedly adding the same POV material. —hike395 (talk) 05:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'm always amazed what articles end up being contentious. GedUK  13:33, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101 (talk) 04:07, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Feels rather drive by, or school based, so 3 days is probably plenty. GedUK  13:30, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Vandalism by sock puppet IPs. Recent IPs: 98.88.167.217 was blocked and returned as 98.88.172.32 with same vandalism. Previous IPs had same edits. Request one week block. Rivertown (talk) 03:43, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:25, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Highly visible template – High profile story about her personal life today has resulted in persistent IP editing of that content. SGMD1 Talk/Contribs 03:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:20, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An IP editor (with a dynamic IP address) has been adding an external link in article body in two articles 1) Ramakrishna and 2) this one Gauri Ma. I reported it here Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive772#External_link_in_article_body where an admin added the link to XLinkBot which was not very helpful. Then I posted it in admin's talk page here. The admin protected the article for 3 months. In the other article (i.e. Gauri Ma) they are continuing addition of link in body. The admin is now inactive per talk page notice and contribution list.

Page protection or any other suggestion? The way they are continuously mentioning "Reference: example.com" I have a hunch the article may contain some copyvio portion. Tito Dutta (talk) 01:52, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. 3 months seems excessive for first protection. GedUK  13:16, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Multiple IPs and new accounts repeatedly adding contentious criticism of a political ad with no reference. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 01:30, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite full protection: This page controls a major bot and should only need to be edited by administrators to stop the bot from editing. Other editing could be extremely disruptive. Vacation9 (talk) 06:31, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jvwikie (talk • contribs)

Note that above user has been reverted for adding promotional language to the article. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:16, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined Ian.thomson is correct: we're not going to protect the article to preerve your (Jwvikie's) promotional version. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:11, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Immediately upon expiration of the previous full protection, the same user is attempting to reinsert his material against established consensus. N419BH 23:18, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Resumption of edit warring following full protection is better met with blocks than with re-protection, otherwise the user can simply lock up the article forever. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:09, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Inbound IP sock attacks. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 02:03, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Acroterion. Armbrust The Homonculus 03:34, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP disruptive edits.Spylab (talk) 23:00, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Edits appear to be a content dispute, and I don't see anyone trying to discuss on the talk page, or even using edit summaries. Open a discussion, and if IPs keep edit warring, then we'll protect on those grounds to force the conversation. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:05, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and unsourced additions. Xwomanizerx (talk) 21:25, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:02, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Note: Both users were recently advised about (and blocked for) EW/3RR. SMS Talk 05:20, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Note: I've left a comment on the talk page, which I hope might solve this. That being said, if another admin wants to protect, or block, or whatever, I certainly don't consider this actioned. GedUK  13:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
There have been no notices on this. JTBX has been warring on other pages (Shawshank Redemption and The Road), and it seems he alienates everyone. It is important to realize that all of his suggestions are judged on the merits, without exception. --Ring Cinema (talk) 17:24, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Declined Looks like this request has gone stale. If there is an editor that is causing problems on multiple articles, you may need to start a discussion on that editor in an appropriate forum. ‑Scottywong| confer _ 20:42, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

02 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated vandalism from various IPs. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:27, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 21:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism and deletions of content to conceal spoilers. If possible, it would be appreciated if this could be protected until a week after the US release date of Skyfall, 8 November. - SchroCat (^ • @) 19:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| babble _ 21:17, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism and lots of arguments from users outside of the areas its been released deleting content to conceal spoilers. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:00, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Also this was only just recently unprotected after being protected for similar reasons. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:45, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| chat _ 21:16, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Very persistent vandalism From User talk:152.131.8.131. Corpusfury (talk) 17:39, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. ‑Scottywong| spout _ 18:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced content. Jetstreamer Talk 13:15, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ‑Scottywong| babble _ 18:25, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: IP users keep adding unsourced content, thus violating WP:VERIFY, despite being warned not to do so. Jetstreamer Talk 13:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ‑Scottywong| spout _ 18:25, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Constant vandalism/BLP violations and the page has been protected so many times before. Puffin Let's talk! 18:32, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| express _ 18:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Puffin Let's talk! 17:31, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| confer _ 18:33, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous removal of cited information by IP's. JJJ (talk) 17:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| yak _ 18:32, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated insertion of unsourced personal information from various new accounts and IPs. Rivertorch (talk) 15:00, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Should be sorted out on talk page with references. Rmhermen (talk) 16:36, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The last consecutive 20 edits (a period of 3 days) have been vandalism and reverts of vandalism. Of the last 50 edits, fewer than 10 are not vandalism-related. . ~Adjwilley (talk) 14:50, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Reaper Eternal. ‑Scottywong| soliloquize _ 18:22, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – Persistent reenter of "season" in the article title. All The Amazing Race articles don't have the "season" article. ApprenticeFan work 14:17, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Move protected indefinitely. Now would be a good time to start a requested move. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:02, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. Well, actually I did protect the page at first, but then I realised that it was a speedy deletion candidate (under CSD A7), so I deleted it. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:22, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-protection: I would protect it myself, except I'm far too involved. The page is at AFD, and IPs keep removing the AFD notice. The first IP was fully warned, and I was ready to report it at WP:AIV if it removed the notice again. Except the most recent time was from a different, but very similar IP. So requesting semi-protection, just long enough for the AFD to complete without further interference. TexasAndroid (talk) 13:31, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:11, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tomcat (7) 13:04, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:18, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism mostly propagandas most likely done to increase the interest to the film since it is still showing theatrically. Hollyckuhno (talk) 11:11, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:14, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Hollyckuhno (talk) 14:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism - They also deleted the default logo of the show without purpose reason resulting also to vandalism. Alphonsewan (talk) 06:00, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I'm really not seeing vandalism. I'm seeing plenty of good faith edits, a lot of which are improving the article, and a mistake with the picture and infobox, which is easily done if you're not familiar with a wiki's formatting syntax. GedUK  13:01, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Edit warring . E4024 (talk) 23:44, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I'm hopeful the discussion underway will preclude having to protect. Relist if necessary. GedUK  13:16, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection because of persistent vandalism by IP's. teammathi (talk) 22:27, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Seesm to be one IP only, and if they're vandalising, better to take action against the single IP. And I'm not sure they are vandalising. GedUK  12:32, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined This isn't really the venue to properly assess notability, especially if the protecting admin has already declined to unprotect. AFC is probably the best place. GedUK  12:27, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Increasing IP vandalism for the track writers in the past few days. Morhange (talk) 05:50, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Ekabhishektalk 10:00, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: This article has been vandalized persistently, maybe by the same person using different IP's, given that he/she does always the same changes referring to the year of birth of the artist and her age, according to the mentions of the years along her career. The article was protected previously, the last time for one week, but, when the protection ended, the vandalism came back. Rafa XIII (talk) 02:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Still far too soon to go indefinite. GedUK  12:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Oh, thank you! Don't know what went wrong there. GedUK  13:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Persistent addition of unsourced content. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:07, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:40, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:21, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Ks0stm. (6 months) Armbrust The Homonculus 09:31, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Since the beginning of Oct 2012, this page has been hit with persistent vandalism. Even more so the last two days. One of the IPs did it enough to get blocked. Now it looks like IP-hopping to avoid a block. Could there be a temporary protection that only registered users can edit? . — Maile (talk) 23:41, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection. Kolega2357 (talk) 21:56, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Here only anonymous users enter information, I returnet several times changes using Twinkle. Please protect article to six months. --Kolega2357 (talk) 22:00, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only one anonymous user has done anything since the expiration of the protection that I levied some days ago, and the edits were all self-reverted. Please come back if multiple IPs start causing problems. Nyttend (talk) 00:17, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Seems to have been hit by a fairly major edit war between several editors. No 3RR breaches as yetspoke too soon. NtheP (talk) 23:18, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nyttend (talk) 00:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Every IP edit since June was nationalistic vandalism... WhiteWriterspeaks 20:24, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. – Steel 20:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Follow-up to Hindko et al.[1]

Punjabi language (not protected last time because I spelled it wrong)
Demographics of Pakistan
West Punjab
Mirpur Punjabi
Mirpur, Azad Kashmir
Dogri–Kangri languages
Pahari languages
Category:Languages of Azad Kashmir

An alternative would be to block the editor, who is primarily operating through User:82.198.240.52 and User:87.194.64.73 (see other inactive IPs at User:Ma120/sandbox).

— kwami (talk) 17:02, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. - extended blocks for those two IPs. – Steel 20:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

03 November 2012

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tinton5 (talk) 20:04, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Strongly support - came here to lodge the same request. Silly vandalism encouraged by recent comments. Would suggest regular NJ editors who would "jump on this" have better things to do right now. Can we semi-protect until (at least) after the election, perhaps after the substantive part of the Hurricane Sandy clean-up. Stalwart111 (talk) 22:06, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. IPs also helping to remove vandalism or self-reverting, so only very temporary protection. Steven Walling • talk 22:11, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tinton5 (talk) 16:42, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Steven Walling • talk 22:15, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Requested for a couple of days. IPs reverting cited content and blanking out material; all single purpose accounts/ips.— Wifione Message 10:24, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - Hardly any IP activity, hence semi-protection no use. This is more an issue between you and Higheredutrust, so do carry on the talk page discussions to reach a consensus, avoid edit warring. If not go for a a third opinion or report at dispute resolution noticeboard, before resuming editing. --Ekabhishektalk 15:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Barack Obama (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: Vandalism, multiple IPs. 99.155.206.28 (talk) 17:47, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 17:52, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Repeatedly in constant vandalism by IP's. The Bot cannot do it on its own.--GoShow (............................) 16:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

+ me. It is fast attack by multiple accounts against the bot to confuse it (successfully). You might freeze it on this stable version made by my deep revert. --Reo + 16:27, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected by Bongwarrior --Webclient101talk 16:58, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An IP editor adding personal commentary to the article; doesn't look like he'll give up after the block expires. —Ryulong (琉竜) 06:47, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Also, it's a single user; report the IP to WP:AIV if the it resumes.—Bagumba (talk) 07:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated vandalism by 97.81.123.24. Frappyjohn (talk) 00:47, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined, Single user only. No recent activity, but I gave a final warning. Report to WP:AIV if it persists. —Bagumba (talk) 06:59, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editor performing slow-speed vandalism over the past week. —Ryulong (琉竜) 06:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 07:13, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Full protection. We're currently discussing in WikiProject LGBT studies if the term "homosexual" should be replaced by "gay/lebian" because some users believe "homosexual" is offensive according to some publication editorial guideline. This is not entirely supported by other users in the discussion. However some user still persists in changing the term before consensus has been made. I request to rollback the article version to 08:33, 2 November 2012 by user:SudoGhost and fully protect it before user:CTF83! Alt starting to change the term. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 03:42, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 07:47, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Last 1-yr was not long enough.—Bagumba (talk) 07:53, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. – Connormah (talk) 23:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Judging by history, may need to request extension if it resumes.—Bagumba (talk) 06:50, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated similar vandalism from multiple IPs. It happens almost every day. Temporary protection won't help. --Moscow Connection (talk) 23:15, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The page had only been protected for a week previously, so it's a bit too big a jump to protect it indefinitely. If the disruption continues after the protection expires, feel free to make a new request, though. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 00:17, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP attack . WhiteWriterspeaks 20:18, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Only one IP involved, seems like more of a content dispute than persistent vandalism. ‑Scottywong| yak _ 21:19, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: IPs have been adding unsourced album sales since October. — Oz (talk) 21:32, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| spill the beans _ 21:55, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection With the release of this album a couple weeks away, IPs are trying to put in their own tracklists. No sources verify the tracklist yet. Should remain a redirect until verifiable information is available. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 21:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Protected until a few days before it's released. ‑Scottywong| speak _ 21:48, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP sock of unsanctoned editor Castlebar guy keeps altering article with unsourced material. Murry1975 (talk) 18:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. ‑Scottywong| confess _ 21:13, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP sock of unsanctoned editor Castlebar guy keeps altering article with unsourced material. Murry1975 (talk) 18:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ‑Scottywong| converse _ 21:10, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

04 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A whole lot of vandalism edits and reverts the last month. -- Luke (Talk) 16:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:37, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:41, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent changes and additions have been all vandal. . Oda Mari (talk) 09:02, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:39, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Bitcoin (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some IP editor keeps vandalising the discussion page while evading blocks. Please semi-protect for a few hours. Keφr (talk) 14:59, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:11, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Edit warring. One very new editor is disruptively reverting edits in the midst of a nominate for deletion discussion.--0pen$0urce (talk) 07:35, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. As a footnote, the alleged editor in question is autoconfirmed and wouldn't be impacted by semi-protection anyways.—Bagumba (talk) 08:32, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP hopper adds "Just Purrfect" for no good reason. Elizium23 (talk) 01:47, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: Leaning towards not enough vandalism, but will leave open for further monitoring. —Bagumba (talk) 07:22, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. No edits to article since I last wrote.—Bagumba (talk) 08:25, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. STATic message me! 06:31, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:07, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP misinformation and potential vandalism. A leak has been released for game contents in August, the game was announced a few days ago. The list could be true due to already predicting two new characters, but it can't be confirmed. Please semi-protect! Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 00:07, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:38, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – We have persistent and ongoing vandalism of a BLP article by a series of SPA new accounts. Recommend blocking IP and new editors for a time. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:09, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, seems to have let up, at least for now. May be a UK time zone thing. Anyway, not actually "ongoing" at this time. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:05, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:50, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Two children edit warring in the lamest who-can-piss-furthest-up-the-wall contest I have ever seen. Frankly they should both be wikislapped with a week's block but I suspect it is probably easier to just lock the article until they get bored and go back to their self abuse and crochet. . Biker Biker (talk) 22:50, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:56, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Similar reasons to protection of List of Pokémon episodes. —Ryulong (琉竜) 07:15, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected., but this won't help much as most of the users are confirmed. Suggest talking to to them individually. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:00, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Similar reasons to protection of List of Pokémon episodes. —Ryulong (琉竜) 07:14, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. but this won't help much as most of the users are confirmed. Suggest talking to to them individually. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:04, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
IPs seem to be causing the most problems though.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. STATic message me! 04:47, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:26, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection regular recent vandalism by new accounts. 02:58, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. The new accounts look like socks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:33, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Persistent sockpuppetry. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:59, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:36, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Full protection: IP/new user SPA vandalism, but those users are aware of the autoconfirm process, so semi alone will not solve the problem. MSJapan (talk) 15:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. This can be contained by watching the page. 'Those' users have been blocked. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:20, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Lots of recent edit warring, POV insertion, and vandalism...Also, likely socking or meatpuppetry going on. (User:Fackyuo, several of the IPs, and User:Plausy seem to share a common agenda). Requesting a few days of semi-protection. . ~Adjwilley (talk) 03:27, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Please report any vandals to WP:AIV, and any socks to WP:SPI. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:09, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Constant vandalism from unregistered users. Article is of Top Importance and vandalism on such an article should not be permitted.--WonderBoy1998 (talk) 18:01, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Steven Walling • talk 22:08, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Full-protection: Someone from Islamabad, Pakistan[2], began removing specifically the mention of Afghan (Pathan/Pashtun) [3], which is properly sourced. Milescoast.wiki (talk · contribs) came and began removing Afghan/Pashtun cats [4] which was reverted. Then various IPs from Russia, Colombia, USA, and new a name (Neelkamala (talk · contribs)) began removing the same Afghan info in the same way as the previous blocked editor and Pakistani IP. [5], [6], [7], [8]

As for Afghan (Pathan), I provided these: [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]

Including these:

Khan was born in Bangalore to an Afghan father and an Irani mother in 1939. He moved to Mumbai in 1959 and made his acting debut with Didi in 1960. His early years were full of struggle but the pathan got his due with Oonche Log, followed by Arzoo. He played second lead in both films and then in Aadmi Aur Insaan and Mela, co-starring bhai Sanjay.

— The Times of India, [16]

"Sanjay Khan's brother, Feroze Khan had gone to Afghanistan to shoot his film, Dharmatma. He told me that he had wanted to go back, but the situation was not inimical for the visit," he said. Their father came from Ghazni in Afghanistan, and settled in Bangalore where the Khan brothers were born. Feroze Khan went to Afghanistan to make his 1975 film, which was the first Indian movie to be shot in the starkly-landscaped country.

— Mid Day, [17]

Is it safe or not to add Indian people of Afghan descent? This person Fardeen Khan is one of a major Bollywood film actors, his family are all in Bollywood film industry and many, at least over a billion people watch their movies, people probably want to trace the origins of this family so I think it should be told.Chilum aw charrs (talk) 00:26, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Hardly any IP activity, more of edit warring and dispute. Do continue your discussions on talkpage to reach a consensus. --Ekabhishektalk 03:07, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism due to this. MJMyers2 (talk) 23:18, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected. by Shubinator --Webclient101talk 23:39, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Full protection due to edit warring by many parties over the global warming section. (I haven't edited.) Steven Walling • talk 21:51, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected done. I'll make a note on the talk page. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:06, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Full protection: IP/new user SPA vandalism, but those users are aware of the autoconfirm process, so semi alone will not solve the problem. MSJapan (talk) 15:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected by Andonic --Webclient101talk 22:40, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

05 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – As soon as semi-protection is removed then the same copyright violating material is added by another contributor (new account this time instead of IP). Longer protection that last time please. . Biker Biker (talk) 19:45, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| babble _ 21:40, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism.... it comes and goes in waves but nearly all IP edits for several months are vandalism. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:01, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 21:35, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

The issue concerns the webpage of Eric Dill (http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Eric_Dill&redirect=no) . He meets the criteria for notability for musicians. However, noone wants to edit his page. In Wikipedia, it is written that users may request established Wikipedia users to edit the page. I would like to ask you to edit the abovementioned page.

I wrote thousands of words in the talk of Eric Dill - http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Eric_Dill#Edit_request_on_2_November_2012. However, I have not received an answer.

Thank you very much for your understanding.

Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwdimov (talk • contribs) 17:06, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined This page is not for requesting edits to pages. Feel free to use {{editprotected}} on the talk page of the article to request that somebody make an edit for you. Good luck! Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:38, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

short term semi protect - there is a twit campaign to upload a photo of uncertain copyright status. not sure if locking the page is the best method or letting the attempted uploads get in place to be able to track back to the files themselves here or on commons. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 20:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Per advice given in discussion at http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Appropriate_for_semi-protection.3F_Or_another_solution.3F, "pushing your views at one article using multiple IPs (against others' objections) *does* violate WP:SOCK. I suggest three months of semiprotection" and history of deliberate and admitted misrepresentation of sources by IPs. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:30, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. 3 months is a bit much for an article that's never been protected before. ‑Scottywong| gossip _ 20:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Per advice given in discussion at http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Appropriate_for_semi-protection.3F_Or_another_solution.3F, "pushing your views at one article using multiple IPs (against others' objections) *does* violate WP:SOCK. I suggest three months of semiprotection" and history of deliberate and admitted misrepresentation of sources by IPs. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:27, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. 3 months is a bit much for an article that's never been protected before. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 20:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: I Wanna protect my page Because i want to ban editing from Unregistered and newly registered user for this page Thank You. Greatuser (talk) 15:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

This is your sixth request for page protection in two weeks ([18] [19] [20] [21] [22]). All the past requests were declined because your reasons were spurious and/or not supported by the protection policy. What makes you think the request is going to be granted this time? Nothing has changed; your page still isn't being vandalized. Your persistent abuse of process is liable to get you blocked. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:56, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined as per before. Please stop these baseless requests for protection. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:17, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: There is an IP who damages this article and adds wrong information into the article while there is an English valid source in technology subjects (Engadget) but the IP insistence on a foreign language source while we all know English Wikipedia prefers English and of course valid sources (like Engadget). For more information you can see the history of the article. Please make the article to a semi-protected page. sincerely --Faramarz♚♔♚ 02:45, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:21, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Possible persistent vandalism - Unregistered IPs is changing the box office gross of the movie without purpose reason/sources. The movie is still showing theatrically so for safe edits, this page should be temporarily protected. Alphonsewan (talk) 05:22, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There seem to be plenty of non-disruptive edits by other IPs. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:13, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Temporary protection was granted. When protection lifted, unsourced changes to Malhotra's birthdate continued. Changes to parents names and films, plus unsourced material such as awards are now being done. Bgwhite (talk) 06:30, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected. – Steel 20:06, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of inexplicable claims re Bea Binene (generally calling her a marketing campaign) by several IPs over the past 3 weeks. SummerPhD (talk) 05:39, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected – Steel 20:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-protection: Notvandalism per se, but a whole host of unsourced edits to a new current event page.Lihaas (talk) 13:05, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This page was protected again before and vandalism has started again. People write abuse towards the main actors in the film and change the name of the director over and over again. Some users also delete important quotes just because it goes against their favorite actor's image. Please protect it again so at least the registered users and change it and someone is accountable rather than a nameless IP address. . Ashermadan (talk) 23:19, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Hopefully such activity will fade after it releases. Let's watch after this.. --Ekabhishektalk 17:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

TemporarySemi-protection: continuous removal of material related to abuses and maltreatment of detainees by IP addresses. Constantine ✍ 23:16, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected – Steel 19:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Rising levels of IP vandalism in conjunction with a current ongoing, semi-protected event (United States presidential election, 2012). Cornwallace256 (talk) 22:18, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected. by User:Y – Steel 19:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite full-protection. This page was redirected at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Bongino, but a single-purpose account has continually reverted the redirect, despite the consensus and overwhelming precedent. I'd either fully protect (he is autoconfirmed) or block the editor, but I am marginally involved, through my several reverts over the past week. I have dropped a uw-disruptive3 warning on his page, at the end of the discussion thread about the redirect from 11 October. Horologium (talk) 16:03, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected indefinitely. Your use of rollback for non-vandal edits leaves much to be desired, however. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-protection: Recently unprotected, vandalism has started again. benzband (talk) 11:42, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:11, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – If you look at the edit history you will see that about 50% of all edits made in the last 30 days have been reverting IPs. I suspect sock vandals, but of course there is not proof enough for an SPI. . ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 21:48, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:25, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 21:05, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Hopefully that will keep the sockpuppets off the page. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:23, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Bitcoin (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection - Editor was blocked for sockpuppetry and started spamming the talk page with vandalism, causing the page to be protected for 24 hours. Semi-protection has ended and the editor has resumed vandalism of the talk page (image NSFW). - SudoGhost 15:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Timotheus Canens. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism, IP edit warring - unknown IPs keeps adding upcoming movies without reliable sources. Alphonsewan (talk) 7:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-protection: Possible persistent vandalism: unknown user inserting false, discriminatory remarks regarding APCI belief systems Grantyboy050 (talk) 11:08, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I can see only one instance of this happening in the article's recent history. User has been warned; consider reporting to AIV if it continues. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protect. Recurrent persistent IP vandalism. --HectorMoffet (talk) 09:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Content dispute (and not sufficiently egrarious to warrant protection against edit-warring). Consider dispute resolution instead. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:18, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Michael-Horowitz (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite protection: Blocked account, solely disruptive. 99.155.206.28 (talk) 15:03, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Armbrust The Homonculus 18:01, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism, IP edit warring. — further, Francophonie&Androphilie sayeth naught (Je vous invite à me parler) 08:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected. by User:Materialscientist. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Requesting a full protect until the election is over, as a safeguard against vandalism on Tuesday. Six Sided Pun Vows (talk | contribs | former account) 02:55, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively., semi should suffice. – Connormah (talk) 03:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Requesting a full protect until the election is over, as a safeguard against vandalism on Tuesday. Six Sided Pun Vows (talk | contribs | former account) 02:55, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively., semi should suffice. – Connormah (talk) 03:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent spate of vandalism; all of the edits today are vandalism and attempts to revert same; article is still a mess. The Old JacobiteThe '45 00:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of ten days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-protection: Ongoing BLP-related vandalism from multiple IP. Could do with temporary protection until this passes. Bilby (talk) 00:02, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected by Elockid --Webclient101talk 01:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: IP edit-warring. Ankh.Morpork 20:44, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined The confirmed users are just as much guilty of edit warring here. I'm going to try to intervene on the talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:27, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: IPs edit-warring related to positions. IPs adding information not found on the sources. BLP concerns. Similar actions plague several K-pop articles. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 19:34, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:24, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection Persistent disruption. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:18, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:24, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. STATic message me! 18:27, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:55, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:59, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. В и к и T 16:48, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Backdoor attempt to restore protected Project64 article in opposition to afd. duffbeerforme (talk) 15:19, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:43, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Diaoyutai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Talk:Diaoyutai (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite full protection. Content-forks of the main article for the Senkaku Islands, currently a fully-protected page. -- KC9TV 19:27, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

 Comment: The article was already indefinitely full protected by Steven Walling (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homonculus 09:20, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected by Steven Walling (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), the prot came in after the request here, best to assume it was protected as a result of this. tutterMouse (talk) 19:32, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

06 November 2012

Indefinite semi-protection: School appears to be in full swing, and so is vandalism on this article. In recent times, over 80% (my estimate) of edits have been vandalism or reversions thereof. Its long tradition of vandalism shows that it's not going to improve. Toccata quarta (talk) 18:47, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Feel free to request longer if it persists.—Bagumba (talk) 19:20, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. SMS Talk 18:22, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Already done by administrator Ponyo.. —Bagumba (talk) 19:21, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection persistent vandalism from IP Address (talk). Last request by another User to this Article, caused the IP address to be blocked for 3 days. As soon as the IP came back from block, it continued with the exact same vandalism. With Thanks, King of Nothing (talk) 14:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Result of last request was for the IP Address: 152.131.8.131 to be blocked for 3 days. I'm not sure what action is necessary, but the IP address returned from the block and immediately re-vandalized the MGM-52 Lance Article. King of Nothing (talk) 14:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
User(s) blocked. for 2 weeks. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – just until wed. after election day, a brand new user is removing content and has done so twice, I just think it would be prudent to limit editing to only confirmed users. Go Phightins! 04:00, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined The user is autoconfirmed, so it would have to be full protection to stop them from editing the article. A block would probably be better - if they resume blanking, revert and give them a final warning, and if they ignore the final warning report them at WP:AIV. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:03, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Edits from various IPs and some newly-registered accounts are veering into BLP territory. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 03:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined If I had caught this a few hours ago I would have protected, but now it looks stale. If the vandalism resumes please re-report. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:09, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tomcat (7) 16:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Reaper Eternal. (1 year) Armbrust The Homonculus 17:27, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous blanking. Widr (talk) 15:33, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:34, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection - for the love of God, can someone please semi this until after the election. A new SPA IP has now reframed an entire section as a WP:WEIGHTY political attack - basically, "Romney: Bad, Obama: Good". Article started as a POV-pushing attack and is now at AFD. Hopefully interest will be near-zero after tomorrow (tonight for all you Americans). Thanks all, Stalwart111 (talk) 12:06, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The IP's edits may well violate WP:WEIGHT, but I don't think they amount to actual disruption. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Seems to have declined yesterday's reuquest, but since then there are a whole bunch of IP/new editor edits, all or almost all of which are unconsctructive vandalism/unsourced.Lihaas (talk) 02:21, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection was recently made for this page, and was denied at some point within the last 7 days. Snotbot  t • c »  02:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
    Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This was a tough call, as there were quite a few beneficial IP edits a couple of days ago. The vandalism today is enough to warrant a short period of protection, though. I will monitor the page for a while after the protection expires. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:27, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: Make way for Jordan "Sparklez" Maron. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 05:33, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Question: Are we sure that this guy who makes youtube song parodies is notable? ‑Scottywong| chatter _ 04:00, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
There's a few good sources for some form of notability, result of a flavour of the month thing sure but they're there. There's always AfD for the curious. tutterMouse (talk) 05:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Unprotected I'll move the page and see what AfD has to say about it. ‑Scottywong| confess _ 05:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection The article was protected by Yellowmonkey indefinitely in 2010. He is retired now, and the page was unprotected because of the PC trial, by that time it didn't receive vandalism, but it was re-protected. Let's see how it works this time. Note, it is linked to the Main Page today and tomorrow. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotected GedUK  13:03, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

temporary semi-protection there is an upswing in IP vandalism -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:40, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection This is the 4th time a suspected sock user has edited the article putting in fictitious material and citing it with a fiction/fantasy book passing it off as a reliable source. They also purposely mislead their edit summaries so that others might believe their edit as legitimate [23]. Can this user:Koyrda66 edit be undone before protection since the proof is in the source that it is fiction? This is also a suspected sock of WP:DUCK user Plouton2 who is known for this kind of behavior with articles. Also, often this article receives vandal by random IP users who insert unnecessary slang or derogatory comments, example [24]. ProfessionalScholar (talk) 20:35, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Protection is not used to resolve content disputes. Please start a discussion on the article's talk page. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 21:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection IP removing information from the lede (thus creating misinformation). I'm not certain if temporary will solve the issue or not, so I will err on the side of permanent. MSJapan (talk) 20:08, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I'm not even sure that this is technically vandalism. ‑Scottywong| converse _ 21:45, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of vandalism and has been protected before. As soon as it was unprotected vandals came back. §h₳un 9∞76 01:02, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 01:06, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – In the last few weeks there has been persistent vandalism on the article. §h₳un 9∞76 00:59, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 01:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Binksternet (talk) 20:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:58, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: A living actress who also starred in porn flicks in her youth, something that later caused her considerable distress. There are persistent attempts by IP editors to prominently highlight her porn career in the lead. Consensus among the established editors editing the page is that this violates WP:UNDUE, and the way these additions are phrased often also violate WP:BLP.  Sandstein  22:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Done Mark Arsten (talk) 00:45, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism in particular since July 2012. Anonymous editors primarily dispute Dalton's nationality and year of birth. These editors will not discuss their position on the article's talk page nor do they address the RS we cite. All Bond-related articles are now subject to a higher than usual amount of vandalism and erroneous edits. Given the length of time and the number of different anonymous editors, I ask that protection be granted for at least a month. Very few anonymous editors have contributed anything to the article, especially recently. Several experienced Bond-page wiki editors have accommodated genuine edit requests on other protected Bond-related pages. The page was last protected in 2009 for excessive vandalism. - Fanthrillers (talk) 22:18, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. JohnCD (talk) 23:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Non-neutral POV, consistent group sockpuppetry and vandalism of a potentially notable article that does not meet neutral POV, article should be protected circa my last edit as a stub to prevent further vandalism for the timebeing and to prevent users from accidentally reverting to vandalized versions of the article. 75.70.221.14 (talk) 20:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of seven days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:48, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Two edits in two weeks from unregistered users, obvious vandalism. BroWCarey (talk) 20:41, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There's only been 8 edits so far this year. Protection is for pages with persistent vandalism. ‑Scottywong| speak _ 20:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Apart from reverts, almost all the edits over the past two months have been various IPs deleting the same text. The deletions have been more frequent recently so semi-protection will give the article a rest. Wayne (talk) 01:22, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. Recent content dispute seems entirely legitimate. – Steel 20:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Has been constantly ridden by vandalism. ZappaOMati 23:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 23:39, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Request page protection until after Nov 19th. Mass changes of information by IPs. The event in question is on Nov 18th, and so semi-protection until after the event has finished should stop introduction of deliberate factual errors. – Richard BB 22:52, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. JohnCD (talk) 23:47, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Page gets hit pretty regularly but today they are coming so fast that some vandalism is getting through in spite of (or hidden in) any reverts. The IPs are from all over North America so it isn't just one school messing with us. MarnetteD | Talk 21:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. JohnCD (talk) 23:40, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

07 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 19:19, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:59, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Sockpuppet that was blocked yesterday now making same edits as an IP. 72Dino (talk) 17:05, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:28, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism ongoing. Span (talk) 14:56, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:24, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 11:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Feel free to refile if vandalism resumes. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:57, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent ongoing POV pushing and user abuse by sock of banned user. (See this for example[25]). Would appreciate a semi until a range block can be set up. LK (talk) 06:23, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

No, no, this one is a far better example of why this page should be immediately protected. Use this example. It's clear the page needs protection.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.79.201 (talk) 13:39, 7 November 2012‎ (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:United States presidential election, 2012 (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Anti-Obama vandalism/incorrect vote counts on the talk page. gwickwire | Leave a message 04:53, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined The worst vandal has been blocked, and there are enough constructive edits to the talk page by IPs that I'm reluctant to protect. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:52, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite protection: Candidate for PROD/CSD; page creator and other editor edit warring over PROD template. ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 19:50, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: Page deleted by JohnCD. BencherliteTalk 20:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined per Bencherlite. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:59, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Binksternet (talk) 02:10, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: Only two IP editors are involved currently. Blocking might be a better option if this escalates to an edit war. Continue to monitor.—Bagumba (talk) 03:47, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined per Bagumba. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:00, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Kibus1 (talk · contribs) claims to be the subject, and is determined to keep "his" version of the page. User has been warned several times but won't stop. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 07:11, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:24, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: High level of vandalism by new and unregistered users. A temporary lock of a few days ought to detract the offenders. Thevampireashlee (talk) 03:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The page was previously protected for three months, and since that protection expired the vast majority of IP edits have been unsourced or not constructive. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:17, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: For a week. Had requested semi last week mentioning increasing ip vandalism and blanket removal of content; it was declined due to what the admin noted as lack of ip activity. Subsequently, I put in an SPI complaint against User:Higheredutrust. Higheredutrust was blocked for suspected meatpuppetry post my note at the SPI board. Now, a host of ips and two fresh accounts have suddenly sprung up blanking content randomly. Request a week's semi-protection. Wifione Message 00:38, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There has been no edits on the article in the month of November, also the issue regarding the above mentioned user also stands resolved, as the account is blocked indefinitely. Article seems safe for now. --Ekabhishektalk 04:25, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Question: Ekabhishek, I see quite some number of edits in the month of November. I hope you've been looking at the right article. Also, as you were the declining admin in the request for protection last week, would you be ok if I request another admin to take a second look at protecting/not protecting the article? Thanks and regards. Wifione Message 05:55, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Error on my part I admit, I did see some other page, and you are right there is an issue there of increased IP activity after the banning of the user, I apologize for the inconvenience this time. --Ekabhishektalk 07:13, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 2 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Hope this gives you a breather! --Ekabhishektalk 07:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
No problems at all. Thanks for the relook. Wifione Message 10:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Was on Huggle and saw multiple dyn. ip edits that are of the vandalistic nature. --Ecstacy Xtcy3 03:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:40, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tomcat (7) 21:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Wifione Message 01:16, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: - Ongoing and Recent IP Vandalism. Please could you protect for a few weeks/months as i feel the standard few days will not make any difference. Thanks. --Tacita620 (talk) 20:37, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.. I'm watching the page; so if the vandalism increases, will protect. Wifione Message 01:11, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism.... just like Dust bowl for which your granted my recent request the IP vandalism comes and goes in waves but nearly all IP edits for several months are in that category. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Will increase if vandalism increases in the future. Contact me directly or leave another note here. Wifione Message 01:19, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – At this point, the vandalism has begun and unfortunately the only way to stop it is likely full protection. Users can become autoconfirmed relatively quickly, therefore I think full protection is the way to go. Go Phightins! 23:03, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined - It has been vandalized exactly once today. Full protection would be a realistic option only if waves upon waves of autoconfirmed vandals were converging on the article. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:13, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple vandalizing edits in the last 2 days, began with a user that is now blocked, then two IP addresses which appear somewhat similar are restoring vandalism. Jonathanfu (talk) 21:03, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Already done.... By User:Bduke. Wifione Message 01:14, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism.... of the past 100 edits going back to August 2012, at least 75 were either vandalism or reverts of vandalism: 3x as much as all the potentially legitimate edits combined. This is a long-term problem. Protection was requested at least twice before, per talk page. --Rnickel (talk) 00:14, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:40, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protect. In the news in blogs and twitter. See 2 recent edits JRPG (talk) 20:27, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Wifione Message 01:06, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Persistent blp violations, likely to continue for some time owing to current news. DuncanHill (talk) 20:12, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Was going to do so anyway when I saw this request. Semi'd for 1 month, offending edits already revdel'd. BencherliteTalk 20:14, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

08 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: from various IP vandalism ongoing. Span (talk) 13:24, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected – Steel 18:21, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Many IP users are adding false information about the soundtrack, falsely quoting positive reviews to make it sound as though they are negative. Foul language has also been frequent. Certain users are also adding advertisements and recommendations to see a different movie opening on the same date in the body text of the article itself. 11achitturi (talk) 02:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected – Steel 18:19, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

IPs are repeated reverting to an edition of the page that has multiple issues, including WP:NPOV and WP:RS....William 18:44, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected. The IP is almost certainly that other editor, so this will at least keep the reverts to one account. – Steel 18:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Anon users continually adding deliberate factual errors. BarkeepChat/$ 14:26, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected – Steel 18:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Page was multiple recreated with the same AFC content. mabdul 12:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation protected Mark Arsten (talk) 13:20, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Many IP users adding incorrect information. Hard to keep track of them and fix. Teammm talk
email 01:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of four days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some vandalism since the election last night. -- Luke (Talk) 01:25, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:21, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Page has been protected once already, but a couple of editors are repeatedly inserting user editor sources into the article. This directly contravenes the Film project guidelines and goes against the consensus on the talk page. I strongly suspect the IP is a registered editor that I warned earlier today and is trying to evade detection, so semi protection would limit this disruption. Betty Logan (talk) 08:09, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:32, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Mass change to genre without any discussion. Removal of sourced content and adding content without any reliable sources or no source among others. Thanks. Theman244 (talk) 02:54, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Babbarsingh123456's edits are indeed problematic, in that they appear to be blatant POV-pushing — by the way: mass change to genre? Where? This is not a musician... —, but this issue is best handled through discussion and, failing that, blocks or other restrictions (the topic area is under discretionary sanctions, permitted by both ArbCom and the community). Salvio Let's talk about it! 08:49, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Request a 1 day semi-protection, article is for a controversial TV show that is starting 3rd season tognight and it's already attracting vandals. Three anon-IPs keep changing the title of the latest episode that has not been officially listed anywhere. Cyberia23 (talk) 01:06, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Retract my request - I don't think there is a need for it now. Cyberia23 (talk) 04:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined (procedural tagging) Armbrust The Homonculus 05:28, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Highly visible template – Not used a lot, but the recent vandalism wasn't fixed for three weeks, and this is a template. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

One incident of vandalism out of ten edits across four years doesn't really demand semi-protection, like trying to hammer a nail with a mountain. Also, the template like you said isn't used a lot, only nine transclusions in fact. tutterMouse (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined, protection does not appear warranted, per TutterMouse Salvio Let's talk about it! 08:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Since the previous protection was lifted, IPs have once again vandalized the page constantly. ZappaOMati 00:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated IP vandalism by multiple IP's, boasts in edit summaries. Suggest a month or two to cool situation down. Jusdafax 00:42, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. AgadaUrbanit (talk) 23:20, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Salvio Let's talk about it! 08:34, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Page just came out of protection a few days ago and the vandalism is starting up again. Given this page has an extensive history of being in and out of semi-protection, it may be time to go with an indefinite semi-protect or at least a long term semi. Safiel (talk) 05:44, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Webclient101talk 02:58, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Requesting semi-protection but would be happy with some alternate solution / advice as admins see fit. For some bizarre reason, this article is regularly (relative to the subject, from my perspective) the subject of strange vandalism. Mostly partial blanking or replacement of words. I can't understand what makes the article so popular but it consistently gets 800-900 views per day and quite a bit of Feedback (again, relative to other articles) . Any sugestions / thoughts? Stalwart111 23:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The vandalism seems to be well handled, and not so frequent. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 00:03, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection Multiple IPs making unconstructive edits to change the definiton or other changes not helpful to the article over the past couple days. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 23:14, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 00:28, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mattythewhite (talk) 22:03, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for 2 weeks by Bongwarrior (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Deryck C. 22:15, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: Indefinitely semi-protected since 2008 for "Persistent sock vandalism". Neither the protecting administrator nor the alternative contact listed in the log are active on Wikipedia any more, and the issue doesn't appear to have been discussed on the talk page. In addition the block is the only one in the log, so we have no idea if an indefinite block was indeed necessary. --78.144.164.228 (talk) 20:31, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotected —GFOLEY FOUR!— 23:59, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

09 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Fancruft added by numerous IPs. . Manway 15:32, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Reaper Eternal. --Webclient101talk 16:52, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by IPs geo-locating to diverse places -- might well be a coordinated campaign. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 11:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:34, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: I think it would be a good idea to protect until Monday (after Veterans Day) as there is consistent vandalism from both IPs and new accounts. Semi-protection might also be a possibility, but some of the users in question I believe are auto-confirmed. Go Phightins! 21:41, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:26, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: IP 's attempting to add BLP violations (same as for Michael Portillo, Peter Lilley)--81.159.170.110 (talk) 14:24, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree, there are potentially serious BLP issues for these named persons. Shritwod (talk) 11:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. No vandalism for 36 hours or so, and lots of positive contributions by IPs. Please file again if there are more problems, though. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Months-long string of IP editors vandalizing the article. Binksternet (talk) 19:10, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| communicate _ 15:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalized by 4 different IP's in last 29 hours. In light of intermittent vandalism of past, recommend protecting for a few days to see if IP's tire out. — further, Francophonie&Androphilie sayeth naught (Je vous invite à me parler) 18:53, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:04, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi there. No rush, since the page hasn't been vandalized again so far, but I was wondering if there was a reason it hasn't been protected yet? Thanks. — further, Francophonie&Androphilie sayeth naught (Je vous invite à me parler) 20:43, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 Done ‑Scottywong| communicate _ 15:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – consistent vandalism and unnecessary/poor page changes by unregistered users. Lady Lotus (talk) 18:10, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| comment _ 15:50, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: (second request) Apart from reverts, almost all the edits over the past two months have been IPs deleting the same text. Protection was originally declined on the grounds that it was a content dispute. However, The IP is using spurious reasons for deletion such as uncited, POV, claims are inuendos, claims are rejected by academics etc. The text in question has been in the article for several years and is in fact reliably sourced, supported by both primary and secondary sources and is also supported by academics such as Daniel Finkelstein. Even the Wiener Library has accepted the material as factual. The IP is in violation of WP:IJDLI, specifically the section Article content and WP:CENSOR. He has repeatedly been asked to use the Talk page but has so far not done so. Semi-protection may be the only way to force the IP to stop the deletions and use Talk to discuss his problems with the text. Wayne (talk) 08:22, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Please start a discussion on the talk page and invite the IP to discuss it there with you. The edit warring should not continue. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 15:48, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated attempts by a non-logged in user to add a name (presumably their own) to the list of honorees of this society, in violation of a consensus that only demonstrably notable names should be included in such a list. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:56, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| babble _ 15:44, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Jim1138 (talk) 11:03, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:05, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Torreslfchero (talk) 07:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Ekabhishektalk 07:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 Done --Ekabhishektalk 09:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent vandalism by new accounts that get deleted afterwards and by unregistered IP addresses, has been going on since September. ihafez (talk) 17:35, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. This just came off semi, but unfortunately the problem has resurfaced - multiple IPs making derogatory edits to a reasonably high profile BLP, using false edit summaries. - Bilby (talk) 05:15, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Long, but there is nothing worth having coming in here. Courcelles 05:23, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite full protection: No reason that a non-admin should need to edit this page. Vacation9 02:21, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined, The bot operator isn't an admin, so apart from why this would need protection, we're not going to deny the ability to edit the shutoff to the bot's maintainer. Courcelles 02:37, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – FL not called yet, editors keep adding it to the electoral count and the state count for Obama without sourcing. gwickwire | Leave a message 00:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Sorry, I disagree. I explained at more length at the ANI alert. Drmies (talk) 04:39, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. The vandalism isn't out of control yet, but I just reverted the same edit from 3 different IPs. MrChupon (talk) 02:56, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Already done by the Protector Of The Wiki, Elockid. Drmies (talk) 04:37, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. AutomaticStrikeout 00:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Materialscientist. --Webclient101talk 01:32, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – vandalism due to it being a google doodle. yes i am willing to seek consensus and i have read the edit warring policy (talk) 22:41, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 04:40, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistant vandalism almost every day by IP's and every so often by auto confirmed users. §h₳un 9∞76 19:43, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rjd0060 (talk) 00:32, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – BLP and OR issues here, as well as editwarring, possible socking - I just blocked an IP address which was blocked as a proxy a year ago, if it's still a proxy then I'd say sock puppetry is almost certain. Dougweller (talk) 21:36, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator TenOfAllTrades. (1 week) Armbrust The Homonculus 22:53, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent vandalism by new accounts that get deleted afterwards and by unregistered IP addresses; also needs move protection if possible, since Talk Page shows consensus that this page should not be renamed/moved. ihafez (talk) 17:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 19:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism over last month. Waldhorn (talk) 17:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 18:56, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Oven the last few months User:Noobpwner21 has repeatedly vandalized it as well as numorous IP's vandalizing it as well. §h₳un 9∞76 17:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Ruslik_Zero 18:55, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism over the past week. Paris1127 (talk) 14:49, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 18:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:User page design center/Style (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is an helpful information page but face disruption in recent times so i think it needs long protection. ---zeeyanketu talk to me 12:42, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

 Comment: The persistent vandalism was almost two months ago. Armbrust The Homonculus 13:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Steel 18:21, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. LardoBalsamico (talk) 19:09, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. – Steel 18:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Notified a new editor of edit war and 3rr conduct. Think it is best page get protected for a week until things cool down.--0pen$0urce (talk) 13:37, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

{{subst:RFPP/sandbox|p}} – Steel 18:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined. I've unprotected this because the article is at AfD and I don't want to lock out edits which might affect the result (eg, sourcing or w/e). This can be revisited if the article is kept but edit warring continues. – Steel 18:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect this article. It has a long history of vandalism. A common vandalism edit is the change of his nationality in the lead performed by the same user under different ips. . Tomcat (7) 10:04, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Nothing has changed since the previous request. – Steel 18:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

10 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Torreslfchero (talk) 16:52, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 17:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full-protection: Two editors edit warring with one refusing to use the talk page. Frietjes (talk) 21:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. (not by me). Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 11:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: High level of vandalism - Unregistered IPs keeps updating the movie's box office gross without having reliable source. Alphonsewan (talk) 11:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Drmies (talk) 04:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:33, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 100 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 11:36, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Continued insertion of information by IPs that has not yet happened, against WP:CRYSTALBALL. Murry1975 (talk) 17:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 07:21, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High-level is defaming comments concerning Christina from anti-singer commentators. I've seen, online, that people insist on continuing to vandalizing the page due to their vandalizing ways. livelikemusic my talk page! 17:27, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 07:18, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuing IP vandalism.  —Waldhorn (talk) 05:55, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full-protection: Someone bring them BACK without any discussion. jcnJohn Chen (Talk-Contib.) RA 04:50, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 05:05, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: please. Multiple IP addresses keep inserting false information, and erasing valid information with no end in sight. Dream Focus 00:24, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 06:55, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite Semi-protection: Consistent IP edits towards the voice actors and confirmed character list, almost every day. There was a leak back in August, and they keep putting the leak here, which isn't the Wikipedia way, nor is the leak proven true! Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 22:44, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I know, but that doesn't matter, because it just gets worse because there is no way I can stop them from happening. --Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 00:54, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 07:15, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:American Third Position Party (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Re-impose temporary semi-protection - Political rants not related to improving the article picked up again as soon as the previous semi-protection lapsed. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:25, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Drmies (talk) 04:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Re-impose temp semi: The previous protection clearly wasn't long enough Philip Trueman (talk) 02:15, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Done by Bongwarrior. Materialscientist (talk) 02:22, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: This redirect has been repeatedly made into an article by what appears to be many different people. We had a discussion at WT:ELEM (now archived), that determined that this element was not notable enough for an article. Despite this, many people have attempted to recreate it, even though there is a comment in the article that says not to make it. Unless something changes, this element will not become notable, in which case an autoconfirmed user can create the article, and it can be unprotected. StringTheory11 (t • c) 01:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Done Materialscientist (talk) 02:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated IP spam for an anti-aging cream site over the past few days. McGeddon (talk) 17:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Slon02 (talk) 02:04, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism over the last days. Thunder Dope (talk) 17:13, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Vandalism seems to have stopped. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 22:04, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP, who once wrote 'Goddammit have you heard of the "citation needed" template before? Thanks for nothing asshole', keeps putting in unsourced information. . ...William 13:39, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 22:00, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Needs semi-protection as actor is recently deceased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grez868 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 9 November 2012‎

Declined, That is not necessarily a reason to protect, and I don't see too much vandalism happening. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 21:54, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – a spike in IP vandalism in the last few months . §h₳un 9∞76 19:06, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 19:36, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Fama Clamosa (talk) 18:37, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 19:43, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: The article is notorious for repeatedly attracting IP vandalism, and with the closure of City of Heroes due on November 30th it's bound to get worse both before and after the event. Within past two weeks the article has been subject to multiple defacements, partial blankings and highly tendentious editing by multiple parties. I'm filing a WP:NPOV/N on the subject of the latest set shortly. --The Fifth Horseman (talk) 01:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Ruslik_Zero 19:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 23:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit war over the picture belonging to Istanbul... The Banner talk 21:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution.. Edit warring ought to be pretty serious to warrant full protection. Ruslik_Zero 19:21, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Edit-warring by SPAs and ip's to remove sourced information from the article. --Ronz (talk) 19:55, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Ruslik_Zero 19:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Vandalism is nonstop and there is no reason to have the page without protection because as the page is unprotected vandalism takes place immediately. Junebea1 (talk) 19:15, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I do not see any edits reverted as vandalism. Ruslik_Zero 19:16, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, BLP violations continuing after lifting of last protection. 99.149.87.52 (talk) 21:26, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 21:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editors keep making unauthorized edits to this article draft (in my own userspace) which I have been working on for months, and I would prefer that this was semiprotected so that I have no more unauthorized IP edits to deal with until I put it live. L1A1 FAL (talk) 20:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 21:55, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent spats of vandalism. DPH1110 (talk) 18:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP's contributions is vandalism only since very long. Fama Clamosa (talk) 18:43, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

11 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. RadioFan (talk) 18:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 18:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Since recent protection has expired the article has received numerous edits in violation of WP:DERRY & vandalism surrounding his nationality . ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 23:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 18:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - Unregistered IPs keeps changing the rank of the movies without any purpose/reason. They also changing the proper box-office of a film into a higher box-office without sources. See the history edit for more info. Alphonsewan (talk) 11:33, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I don't see anyone reverting anything, so I can't tell that it's obviously vandalism. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP edit-warring. Ankh.Morpork 20:54, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:06, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection or full protection: High level of IP & user vandalism. Vandalism is nonstop and there is no reason to have the page without protection because as the page is unprotected vandalism takes place immediately.

Semi-protected indefinitely. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:04, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: edit warring and addition of spam links. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 09:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Highly visible template – Prevent vandalism. CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 11:01, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Against what vandalism exactly? tutterMouse (talk) 11:12, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Template? Was this meant to be a "User request within own userspace" request, or was this meant for a different page? Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 11:27, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
I think this was the user clicking the first button they could on Twinkle. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:40, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
I would like to prevent any vandalism from taking place on my user page. Thank you. CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 20:55, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Page was recently removed from temporary semi-protection, same group of editors came back to insert unhelpful commentary and starting doing the same to Bigot (disambiguation) below. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 03:00, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Same editors from the Bigotry article that was recently protected trying to insert the same content over at Bigot (disambiguation) from multiple IPs. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 02:56, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Looks like every IP/new-account edit in the past month has been people using the same angry language about Moffat being a "troll" or a "ruiner". McGeddon (talk) 20:55, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 09:18, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Ditto the previous request. 98.223.196.72 (talk) 04:53, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Done Materialscientist (talk) 05:17, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Rcsprinter (chatter) @ 13:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Slon02 (talk) 02:22, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. User:Dijam1 21.11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Slon02 (talk) 02:23, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Page is part of Template:Edit semi-protected, which looks like it's indefinitely semi-protected. 98.223.196.72 (talk) 04:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Done Materialscientist (talk) 04:34, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

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

Indefinite full protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked – Editor is serving an indefinite block but is persistently removing the block notice from his talk page. The talk page ideally needs to be fully protected with the block notice restored (he has currently removed it again). Betty Logan (talk) 00:52, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. Materialscientist (talk) 00:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Requesting the prevention.TheSpetsnaz (talk) 21:23, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined by way of being speedied. tutterMouse (talk) 22:03, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: low-level edit warring by IP. Attempt to discuss potential issues with WP:unsourced, WP:primary, and WP:selfpub degenerated into WP:harassment 1, 2.Ferox Seneca (talk) 11:42, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:56, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Falcon8765 (TALK) 00:32, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:52, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Resurgence of repeated vandalism by "Game Grumps" fanbois. 91.52.227.1 (talk) 20:12, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:49, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. likely hoax page. 4 square? Jim1138 (talk) 00:55, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Done - deleted and salted. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:30, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection from assorted IP vandalism. Span (talk) 15:57, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 17:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from IP raiders. Requesting the prevention.--74.34.77.23 (talk) 15:42, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely.. Courcelles 19:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

12 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Almost all of the IP edits in the last day have been vandalism or unhelpful, including the last three immediate unregistered edits. The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 21:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 21:52, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent edit warring about POV, mainly from IP addresses that are not taking part in the discussion. Two weeks should settle all the events down. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Second this request. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Torreslfchero (talk) 10:37, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The last 2 instances of "vandalism" could be seen as good faiths edits. Lectonar (talk) 15:23, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Re-created 4 times now. Legoktm (talk) 21:10, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. It was created by the same user all four times, and they are now indefinitely blocked, so there doesn't seem to be a need for protection. If different users come back and recreate it, please file a new request. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Request semi-protection for a month until current changes slow down. Reading dozens of changes each day is time-consuming. Let knowledgeable, registered editors perform them. This could be a way of recruiting more editors BTW!. Student7 (talk) 20:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Most recent IP edits are positive contributions, and we don't just protect because an article is being edited a lot. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection per vandalism by multiple IP editors today, many in the past few hours. Suggest several weeks to cool this down. Jusdafax 05:07, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

This was a brief attack, mostly by one editor via proxies (all blocked). I'm watching it and will protect if they return. Materialscientist (talk) 05:19, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined per Materialscientist. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Now every other edit to this page is a registered user reverting an IP. I suspect vandal socks, but of course I have no evidence and will not file an SPI. This is wasting valuable time, please protect this FA. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 02:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| speak _ 15:09, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Regular IP vandalism and edit-warring. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:44, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| chatter _ 15:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Regular IP vandalism and edit-warring. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:44, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 15:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-protection: high number of IP and accounts vandalism over the last few days Evaders99 (talk) 23:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| comment _ 15:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: High level of IP vandalism from the past week and several weeks ago. 96.247.79.136 (talk) 22:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| soliloquize _ 14:56, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. STATic message me! 21:26, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| babble _ 14:53, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. STATic message me! 21:26, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism immediately picked up since expiry of last semi-protection. Mark91it's my world 21:16, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Long history of vandalism. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long history of vandalism. Widr (talk) 20:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:02, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

It has been protected since 2009 due to many users "unredirecting" it even though the singer had no individual notability. Now that he has left DragonForce and started his own band, I think it is time to create his own article, as briefly discussed here. I've just tried contacting the protecting admin, only to find out he's inactive since March, which made me believe I would have no answer at all. Victão Lopes I hear you... 14:51, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Question: Do you have sources that can demonstrate ZP Theart passes WP:BIO or WP:MUSICBIO? We need to see such sources to prove that the concerns raised in the deletion discussions have been satisfied. It's probably best to post them on the article's talk page and then leave a note here when you are ready. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 09:02, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 Done at Talk:ZP Theart. Victão Lopes I hear you... 10:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Unprotected. If anyone wants to contest the recreation of the article, it should go to AfD again. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:23, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! Victão Lopes I hear you... 14:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: IP vandalism: changing true population size with false ones.Farshid7 (talk) 23:04, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. This has happened only once in the last two month. Armbrust The Homonculus 07:30, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi. Repeated IP falsification of the speaker data. — kwami (talk) 20:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:44, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – There's an ongoing news story here, along with a Facebook petition, protests, etc., including a recommendation that people come and start editing Wikipedia. We're just on the cusp of breaking into an edit war, and I think temporary full protection, forcing discussion on the article talk page will help steer new editors into a consensus-building discussion. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:12, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: The edit war never really broke out, so I don't think full-protection is warranted just yet (although I can see things remain rather tense). I'll put the page on my watchlist. I won't be available for a few hours, however, so I'm leaving the request open in case the situation changes while I'm away. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 09:12, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
It hasn't broken out because I stopped reverting (though I should be, because the continuing changes are not really good), and because I already schooled 3 of the "older" (i.e., from 1 day ago) participants to not keep reverting...but we've had 2 new people show up since then, both going way into WP:UNDUE territory. If you want, I can force this into an edit warring situation...but somehow I think that that would be behavior inappropriate of an admin. But I will have to take action eventually to compel discussion, one way or the other. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:20, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
And as further followup, a quite perusal of the last day's history clearly indicates a multi-pronged edit war. Protect the article, or block the involved editors, but please make the craziness stop. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:38, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I was hopeful that they would be able to talk out their differences without me having to lock the page, but they have slipped back to edit warring, so I have protected. I'll continue to monitor the discussion as well. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 08:56, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Full protection. edit warring by autoconfirmed Jim1138 (talk) 03:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined - blocked both warriors, so that others could contribute. Materialscientist (talk) 03:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Page of a person (a poet). Constant IP vandalism with biography of the article's person. Westsomething (talk) 02:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 03:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – article subject currently featured as a Google doodle, vandalism has started. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:48, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I second this request. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 06:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 08:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Long term of IP vandalism with unsourced content. jcnJohn Chen (Talk-Contib.) RA 07:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. I do not see any vandalism. Ruslik_Zero 19:03, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism, For years people are constantly changing her bio, I have set it per her Manager. JSWalti (talk) 22:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I see no reason to issue semi-protection. I need to read WP:V and WP:Copyright before filing any more complaints here. Ruslik_Zero 19:08, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: Was indefinitely protected in 2009, though perhaps a temporary protection would have been more suitable. More prominent players than Mattie Forde are unprotected. 86.40.195.231 (talk) 01:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: notified protecting admin [26]. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:19, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
I protected this, and it should probably have been only temporary. No objection to unprotecting. Tom Harrison Talk 02:11, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Unprotected --Bongwarrior (talk) 03:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Mostly WP:BLPPRIVACY issues with addition of unreferenced birth info. Been going on for a couple of weeks now - seems the only edits are adding and removing that info as unsupported. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:01, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 18:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from socks of User:MUHAMMAD IQBAL ZAHARY NIKPURWIL, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MUHAMMAD IQBAL ZAHARY NIKPURWIL Evaders99 (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

The reporter isn't blocked, the sock mentioned in the report is. Checking on protection. --Bongwarrior (talk) 08:40, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I think I better let someone else handle this. I have no idea what I'm looking at: hardly anything is sourced, what is sourced is in Korean, half of the groups don't have articles, and two entries are apparently from the future. --Bongwarrior (talk) 08:51, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:01, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. SMS Talk 21:48, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. There appears to be problems with both this article and Saraikistan. One of the key elements of the problem is an IP who is warring in both articles, pushing a particular point of view without collaboration or discussion. Therefore, I have warned the IP that any further disruption will be met with a block. Even if the IP is removed from the equation, there may be more that needs to be done to prevent disruption to these articles, but this is a first step.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

13 November 2012

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 21:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. The edit-warring IP was kicked to the curb for 31 hours. Horologium (talk) 21:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected indefinitely. After it was vandalized again while I was busy blocking one IP, I took a look at the protection log and went for indef semi. Horologium (talk) 21:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: IP hopper is edit warring over an issue which has been discussed extensively. Semi protection for just a few days may encourage him to move on or seek the talk page.   — Jess· Δ♥ 18:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for 3 weeks given the disruption evident in the protection log already. Also range blocked 208.13.170.64/28 (which covers 16 addresses including the edit-warring ones) for 72 hours for edit-warring. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:33, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite full protection: Since all additions or subtractions need to be discussed and a consensus reached before changes are made, there's really no reason for "anyone can edit" to apply to the page itself. It goes without saying that implementing this would require one or more admins to read the discussions on the talk page (which would remain unprotected) from time to time pbp 17:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This isn't an administrative page, so indef full seems like overkill. I don't see why admins should have the burden of modifying that page whenever it needs modifying. I protected it to stop a recent content dispute. When the protection expires, it can always be re-protected for a longer period. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I only saw one revert, how is that an edit war that requires full protection? I also don't see the point in indef full protection, but thats a different matter entirely. Legoktm (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandalism by an IP-hopping editor spanning several months, but becoming particularly intense in the last few days. Psychonaut (talk) 21:16, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. I almost declined this, until I saw the same wildly inappropriate vandalism coming from totally unrelated geographic locations (including two on opposite coasts of the US). This has gone on long enough. When the IP gets bored, we can look at removing protection, but we'll leave it at indefinite for now. Horologium (talk) 21:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Habitual target of nonsense/vandalism edits, latest spate of vandalism consists of unsubstantiated rubbish about his "50 children", also unsourced edits about his love-life. Possible consider some version of long-term protection, since article is frequently/daily vandalized. Shearonink (talk) 21:09, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. The protection log indicates a persistent problem here. Horologium (talk) 21:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: IP hopper who keeps changing ROC to Taiwan without discussing on the talk page (I have no opinion other than that the name of the template should match the title and the article). Frietjes (talk) 18:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Full protection: There seems to be an edit war going on between two users for some time (Cantaloupe2 and YuMaNuMa). I know full protection seems a bit over the top but i cannot think of anyway to stop them. Thanks. Tacita620 (talk) 16:11, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. GSK ● talk ● contribs 16:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. After a week the previous semiprotection should be restored. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: There has been multiple changes to the genres listed. At the top I have a notice for people to stop editing the genre and even gave a link to an interview where the band confirmed that they were the genres that I have listed. However, IP addresses continue to change the genres over and over and it is only IP (un-registered) users that keep editing which basically shows me it's people trying to get a rise out of editers. A semi-protect would end this issue. XyphynX9 (talk) 15:29, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. KillerChihuahua?!? 15:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected KillerChihuahua?!? 15:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection requested to prevent persistent vandalism (repeated undiscussed removal of well-sourced and pertinent information) by one or more unregistered editors. ElKevbo (talk) 15:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected KillerChihuahua?!? 15:48, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Ongoing vandalism and edit-warring from the university's own staff (69.27.21.250) and employees (Nemont) after many warnings since 2006. Gratans (talk) 05:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

It might be more productive if you tried to engage the other editor(s) instead of labeling their edits "vandalism" and edit-warring with them because you disagree with them. ElKevbo (talk) 05:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:10, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – All 38 edits since October 20th have been either vandalism or revering vandalism. [27]. Legoktm (talk) 03:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. It seems there's a consensus not to protect at the moment from my reading of WP:AN#Disease article undergoing severe vandalism., but if the vandalism becomes more frequent I think it would be worth filing another report. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism seems consistent, I'm not even sure what's supposed to be on this article or not. Mason Doering (talk) 03:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Wow, what a mess. Someone's going to have to go through that article and check all the sources, or else revert back to 2010 or more. I don't think page protection will help too much though as the vandalism is only sporadic - it's just that no-one has been watching the page at all. Maybe you could ask for help at a WikiProject somewhere? At any rate, I've blocked the most recent vandal and will be keeping an eye on them. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Regular and on-going vandalism additions by a variety of IP addresses. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:46, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The vandalism is pretty sporadic - although there were two instances yesterday, the last one before that was a week ago. Please file another request if it becomes more frequent. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 15:02, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:08, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Article is a known Vandalism Magnet, with persistent IP vandalism (both of the "look what I can do" schoolboy silliness variety and more serious POV conspiracy theory edits). Page has been protected numerous times before, and the vandalism returns as soon as protection is lifted. Request indefinite (or at least long term) protection. Blueboar (talk) 18:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. Maybe you were thinking of a different article? This article has never been protected, and although the majority of IP edits to the page are vandalism, it doesn't seem frequent enough to warrant protection. I'm seeing about 1 or maybe 2 instances of vandalism a week. Please leave me a message on my talk page if there's something obvious that I've missed. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:39, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Constant vandalism. Vandalism script already removed but user Mr.lianza keeps on undoing the revision -- Burningbatsu (talk) 17:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. This would be better dealt with by a block. I have warned Mr.lianza for edit warring and left a personalized note - if the disruption continues please file at WP:AN3 or WP:AIV, whichever you think is more appropriate. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The page faces too much disruption today not only because of unregistered ip's but from sockpuppets too but fortunately they are blocked indefinitely.It needs a little long protection because they will try to attack this running film article again. ---zeeyanketu talk to me 12:07, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of unsourced vague information. Anbu121 (talk me) 09:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Constant vandalism.--Mr.Goblins (talk) 17:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: The IP User who had added vandalism recently after the last protection has been blocked. --Webclient101talk 23:54, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined. This is a borderline case. While there isn't really enough vandalism after the latest protection expired to warrant protecting again, especially due to the worst vandal IP being blocked, this does seem like a likely vandalism target. I'll put it on my watchlist and monitor it. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – There's an religious war going on here, it's not reflecting very well on anyone. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:43, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:24, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Webclient101talk 06:22, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism - repeated blanking of sections and the page as a whole. Page has been blanked six times in the last 24 hours.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 10:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely (though that could be an error on the admin's part given the first protection) by Mike Rosoft (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 12:04, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Anonymous IPs are trying to change the spelling in violation of WP:ENGVAR. It has been going on for some time, but is now happening daily. VMS Mosaic (talk) 02:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some long term vandalism since previous protection expired in October. -- Luke (Talk) 02:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent vandalism from different IP users. Astros4477 (talk) 23:35, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

− Temporary Full protection On going slow edit warring over listing of Conglomerates where other editor (User:King Shadeed) will not respond to talk page, treats my edits as vandalism ([28]), I said you can't edit war to have it your way and This can't go the way you want it. Plus Overture was inactive since 2010.) and given previous attempts at reporting him for edit warring failed because I was [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RRArchive189#User:King_Shadeed_.26_User:DCGeist_reported_by_User:Spshu_.28Result:_Pages_protected.29|consider equal as guilty as User:King Shadeed in previous diputes]] dispite intiating discussion at Major studios and at the template in July. This page protection is to force him to the talk page since the only other way is to edit war. Spshu (talk) 22:42, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. AutomaticStrikeout 04:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Zagalejo. (3 days) Armbrust The Homonculus 10:35, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing vandalism in a short period of time from multiple IP addresses. Singularity42 (talk) 22:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It looks like the vandalism has already abated, but I'm protecting for a day to be on the safe side. Please file another request if more vandalism occurs after the protection wears off. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced content that violates WP:VERIFY. Jetstreamer Talk 21:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection repeated changes / deletions / contentious edits by unregistered and new users. Controversial article by it's very nature. GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 20:33, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unreferenced future episode information. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:08, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Repeated additions of unsourced, negative content from multiple IPs. Rivertorch (talk) 15:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 09:52, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent non-constructive edits from various IPs and new users. Blatant disregard for authoritative source provided for sourcing figures. Fast becoming a chore to maintain article.

Temporary protection I feel would calm the situation. The IPs not being able to edit the page for an extended period will hopefully cause initial discouragement and quickly force a loss of interest in the article.

Temporary protection would also enable efficient communication with IPs who register an account to edit the article (after becoming auto confirmed).Obscure Reality Ping me 11:18, 12 November 2012 (UTC) . Obscure Reality Ping me 11:18, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 09:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Full protection while an RfC is ongoing. Edit warring over adding the discussed new section. Please note that I'm requesting this protection while the page is in what I consider the "wrong" version. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:57, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Edit warring was brief and appears to have stopped. An RfC was started on the talk page, so discussion is resuming appropriately. I'll monitor the page for the next few days to ensure nothing else happens. ‑Scottywong| confer _ 00:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough, and I rather hope that this request had a beneficial effect on the editing there. But please do continue to monitor it. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 01:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit: I want to comment on the minor currency infobox suggestion for the Bitcoin article. Specifically, the last section on the protected talk page. My comment is, "Bitcoin has no issuing authority so no website is needed. Bitcoin.org is also not the issuing authority so putting it there would be inaccurate." Hopkinsenior (talk) 23:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined There has been way to much sockpuppetry and vandalism on that article recently. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:52, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
This user appears to be requesting to be able to edit the talk page. That doesn't seem to relate to sockpuppets messing with the article itself. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 02:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Jim1138 (talk) 01:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:51, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – IP editors are adding unsourced content, yet I keep explaining to them that their "info" doesn't match the official source. In this case, the series finale of "Un refugio para el amor" is December 3, as stated in the video source provided. Platinum Star (talk) 22:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| express _ 00:22, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 18:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 01:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism and nonsense fancruft additions. AdabowtheSecond 22:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Has been protected. AdabowtheSecond 22:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Already protected by administrator Keith D. (1 month) Armbrust The Homonculus 23:12, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Repeated additions of unsourced content and changes to her name/surname throughout the article. Also, additions of a made up relationship. - JuneGloom Talk 20:24, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator AnemoneProjectors. (2 weeks) Armbrust The Homonculus 23:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by several IP addresses. This article has had temporary protection five (5) times, but the vandals keep returning. PKT(alk) 04:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: I don't know...the vandalism is very, very slow...I would not protect, but will leave the decision to another admin Lectonar (talk) 15:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Article has a very long history of vandalism, has been semi-protected for periods of up to 6 months in the past. Vandalism resumes almost immediately after protection expires. I don't think we're to the point where indefinite protection is required, but it's getting close. ‑Scottywong| talk _ 21:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism and nonsense fancruft additions. AdabowtheSecond 22:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Has been protected. AdabowtheSecond 22:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Already protected by administrator Keith D. (1 month) Armbrust The Homonculus 23:12, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Repeated additions of unsourced content and changes to her name/surname throughout the article. Also, additions of a made up relationship. - JuneGloom Talk 20:24, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator AnemoneProjectors. (2 weeks) Armbrust The Homonculus 23:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by several IP addresses. This article has had temporary protection five (5) times, but the vandals keep returning. PKT(alk) 04:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: I don't know...the vandalism is very, very slow...I would not protect, but will leave the decision to another admin Lectonar (talk) 15:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Article has a very long history of vandalism, has been semi-protected for periods of up to 6 months in the past. Vandalism resumes almost immediately after protection expires. I don't think we're to the point where indefinite protection is required, but it's getting close. ‑Scottywong| talk _ 21:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

14 November 2012

Indefinite full protection: Deceased Wikipedian, someone with better understanding, please complete the rest of procedure. I've never encountered something like this before. — Bill william comptonTalk 14:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Checking to see if protection is necessary. ‑Scottywong| express _ 20:14, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected ‑Scottywong| comment _ 20:25, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite full protection: Multiple editors trying to improperly insert their commentary into the AfD after the AfD has closed. Considering that this AfD had personal attacks, socking, and now modification after the closure it seems appropriate to have this locked down from all non-admin editors. If the AfD gets listed at DRV it can be dealt with appropriately. Hasteur (talk) 14:30, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 19:48, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Editors cannot keep up with vandalism level. —hike395 (talk) 05:04, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| verbalize _ 19:10, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection:: Vandalising by block-evading user (see also). OneLittleMouse (talk) 02:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator JamesBWatson. ‑Scottywong| confer _ 18:42, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: - Continued IP vandalism on this film in current theatrical release. My last request was turned down, and the IP vandalism continues. Suggest a few weeks to cool this situation down. Jusdafax 02:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| gossip _ 18:31, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – nationalistic IP struggle warrior. WhiteWriterspeaks 21:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| verbalize _ 18:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. recent IP vandalism (multiple IPs). Tgeairn (talk) 04:13, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks , after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KrakatoaKatie 10:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection Block evading plug-unplug IP vandal adding incorrect information to template. Nate • (chatter) 03:41, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KrakatoaKatie 10:34, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Edit warring. Persistent addition of unsourced content. The edit in question already led to the block of a user. Jetstreamer Talk 01:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I hope this gets all of them, but if there are some autoconfirmed accounts out there that persist and violate 3RR, the address is thataway. KrakatoaKatie 10:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Last protection was not enough, vandalism still continuing. Webclient101talk 00:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 8 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KrakatoaKatie 10:31, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lugia2453 (talk) 20:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 12 weeks , after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KrakatoaKatie 10:23, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High amount of IP vandalism in the wake of trading their most established players to another team. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:19, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 02:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – See history for war details... Fairly OddParents Freak (Fairlyoddparents1234) 22:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. There is only one other user involved including yourself. Discussion on talk pages and not edit summaries could be more effective.—Bagumba (talk) 02:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Completely unprotect for editing, retain protection against moving. This ridiculously tiny stub cites at least 7 sources that can be mined for material to expand the article, but no one can expand it, because someone totally locked the article down. It was subject to move-warring and other edit-warring, but an RfC on the talk page concluded in favor of keeping the diacritics, so that is that. The protection isn't even templated, it's just "still there" for no reason. I suspect that the one or two anti-diacritics campaigners who watch that page may try to move it again, so move protection might still be in order, but the page has to be editable. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 02:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: I've asked Joe Decker, the protecting admin, to have a look, as it was only protected a week ago. I also see the protection is going to expire in nine and a half hours, so it might be best to just come back to it tomorrow. I agree that move protection is a good idea. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I would have actually asked for a protection extension and no page move restrictions as there have been no page moves in quite a long while. But Joe Decker probably knows best and has the call on this one. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Move protected I've extended the move protection, but have withdrawn the edit protection. An RfC on the question at the core of the edit war failed to find consensus (at least someone finally closed that RfC), TENNISNAMES doesn't cover the textual wording being applied, and edits on the article should now be made with respect to local consensus, or a less local consensus should be found. I'm not optimistic that this won't end up back here, or at AN or EW, but there aren't any great options here. --j⚛e deckertalk 17:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Involved in a baseball trade, but not official yet. JRHorse (talk) 01:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: a trade is in the works, but not official, the IPs are all over it. Go Phightins! 00:25, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: a trade is in the works, but not official, the IPs are all over it. Go Phightins! 00:25, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: a trade is in the works, but not official, the IPs are all over it. Go Phightins! 00:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: a trade is in the works, but not official, the IPs are all over it. Go Phightins! 00:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Frequent vandalism during currently occurring eclipse. Request 12 hour semi-protection. TimL • talk 22:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 22:31, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Webclient101talk 19:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Protected against the love letters of teenage girls for three months. (Rolls eyes) At least the vandalism is not the hateful junk we normally have to clean up. Horologium (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
It's protected now. For some reason, I had to protect it three times before it actually stuck. (Yes, I know the bot won't respond; this is for the humans actually reading this.) Horologium (talk) 00:27, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

A use Jon C. has repeatedly deleted my edits to this post, and now another on a related topic, Japanese-Jewish Common Ancestor Theory, at: Japanese-Jewish_Common_Ancestor_Theory

I have sent him a message to his talk page, which he has "moved to the appropriate talk page", but where that is I don't know, because it doesn't show up on my talk page, and he has not sent me a message.

As far as I can tell, there is no justification for his posts, so I assume that he may be a Freemason or Jewish, as those would appear to be the only two affinity groups that would have an emotional attachment to the topics.

Please refer to the talk page messages I have sent to him and to another person, Jayjg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ubikwit (talk • contribs) 13:40, 13 November 2012

perhaps if you were not edit warring to insert original research into the article, he would not be reverting your edits and requesting you try to gain consensus on Talk. I have already warned you about this edit war; your forum shopping here is not helpful. NOTE to reviewing admin: please do review this editor's recent history before making a decision. I am not declining as I did issue the 3RR warning, but am not involved in any article edited by Ubikwit. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
NOTE to UBIKWIT: The appropriate talk page is the article talk page. Go to the article, look at the tab for talk. Or you can go to Talk:Japanese-Jewish_Common_Ancestor_Theory. Every article has a talk page, sometimes termed a discussion page. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:49, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
And he reverted again, and is blocked. He will have time to read all those pesky policies now and will hopefully learn what he did wrong and come back more knowledgeable about Wikipedia's rules. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:58, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. No protection request made, so there's nothing to do here. The block on Ubikwit is only for 24 hours. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

15 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Pending but not completed trade. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:02, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:17, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long standing attempt by multiple IPs to add content to this disambiguation page. Talk page warnings and edit summaries appear to have gone unnoticed. France3470 (talk) 18:32, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – All the edits to the page in the last two days have been reverted as vandalism, and page seems to have a long-term pattern of vandalism. The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 17:27, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:23, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection' This article is the target of folk whom Doniger has upset with her views. They remove cited material and add uncited BLP violating material. It needs a short period of semi-protection to dissuade them from acting in haste or spite. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:17, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Permanent or at the very least long lasting semi-protection. This article has long been under vadal attack from juvenile IP only editors, often in education. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:52, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Protection against anonymous users, user request within own namespace. + Crashdoom Talk 14:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Ruslik_Zero 19:08, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – UK News. Widefox; talk 14:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Deryck C. 15:11, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continual changing of the city column of the table from Gold Coast to the state Queensland see here, here and here. Mtking (edits) 11:24, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:31, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. TheChampionMan1234 10:07, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:27, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – repeatedly ips removing references..... and disruptive editing too Forgot to put name (talk) 08:39, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:28, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: I would like to prevent any vandalism from taking place on my user page. Thank you. :/. CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 08:21, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Armbrust The Homonculus 08:33, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Not long after the last page protection ended, more vandalism appeared from an IP address, adding in a fake character to the list and claiming he had sex with ducks. [wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Duck_Dynasty&diff=523005690&oldid=522724515] History of vandalism by IPs in this article suggest it isn't going to end. Dream Focus 06:54, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Still far too soon for indef, this is only the second protection. GedUK  12:19, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continued vandalism by several IP users after recent protection removal. Areaseven (talk) 06:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined There hasn't been a single edit to this article in almost three weeks. KrakatoaKatie 06:21, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism, frequent dubious changes by anonymous IPs. SFK2 (talk) 05:02, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KrakatoaKatie 06:18, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Armenian article with at least two overlapping edit wars and multiple IP involvement. Reported at ANEW, but could use a break from the new SPAs and IPs. Tgeairn (talk) 04:32, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Already done. by yours truly at AN3. It's semi'd for a week but that might not be long enough. People who want to know what an edit war really looks like should take a look at that history. KrakatoaKatie 06:14, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Recent IP vandalism. Tgeairn (talk) 04:06, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 04:32, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: This article was unprotected yesterday and is already seeing a barrage of IP/new account vandalism today. Chubbles (talk) 02:50, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of six months , after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KrakatoaKatie 03:31, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi. Edits in the last few days have been restricted to IPs trying to change the scope of the article, and signed-in editors reverting them. The article was recently moved after a RfM discussion, a move which I opposed because I expected chronic edit warring would be the result, as it was when we last had the article at this name, but the consensus was that we needed to follow COMMONNAME and to protect the article if this became a problem. — kwami (talk) 20:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm now at 3RR. We're supposed to be able to come here rather than edit war. Protection please? — kwami (talk) 20:48, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Done by Qwyrxian - KrakatoaKatie 03:46, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

On Bitcoin the caption on the sticker-side image of a Casascius coin reads as follows:

Physical 1-BTC Bitcoin with redeemable key exposed.

However, this is incorrect because only the public key is exposed, and I can only imagine that 'redeemable key' is meant to refer to the private key. So I suggest it read as:

Physical 1-BTC Casascius Coin with public key shown.

Or something similar of course :) --Smickles86 (talk) 23:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Is there someone who can tell me how long I should expect to wait to receive an answer or any interaction on this topic? --199.48.69.252 (talk) 02:50, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Done KrakatoaKatie 03:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: persistent vandalism. SFK2 (talk) 01:09, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Slon02 (talk) 01:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Unsourced edits from IPs. — Oz (talk) 21:37, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Slon02 (talk) 01:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated copy-paste of text of unclear copyright from various IPs. Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:58, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I personally favour either very long or permanent semi-protection. This idiot has discovered IP hopping and doesn't seem to want to give up his one man/woman campaign of disruption. --Biker Biker (talk) 00:18, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 01:09, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 16:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Slon02 (talk) 01:46, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101talk 15:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 01:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An anon trying add non-free images to the article for past few months. The page was semi-protected earlier for the same reason. It has become a maintenance hassle for the images being added every time. - Vivvt • (Talk) 14:14, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Slon02 (talk) 01:44, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-permanent semi-protection Despite extensive discussion on the talk page, IPs keep re-adding 22K of copyvio material. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected. Slon02 (talk) 01:42, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Permanent WP:SALT: Article has been repeatedly recreated by User:Faster2010 but there is no substantial (or frankly any) evidence that said movie has been or will be created. The article has been marked for speedy deletion again and has already previously passed WP:AfD with community consensus on the issue. + Crashdoom Talk 00:44, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation protected Slon02 (talk) 01:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism returning almost immediately after the end of a 1-year semi-protection. DPH1110 (talk) 20:38, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Indefinitely. ‑Scottywong| verbalize _ 00:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

protection: High level of IP vandalism / non-ip vandalism as well  KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ...  20:17, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. by Auburn Pilot. Great job !  KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ...  20:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – I provided a source, stating that Sonya Smith is (so far) the only actress confirmed to star in Reina Madre. One editor states that no one is confirmed at all (unsourced), another one states that in addition to Smith, Juan Soler is going to participate (no source provided whatsoever). Platinum Star (talk) 19:09, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Warned editor about edit warring, if it continues he should be blocked. ‑Scottywong| spill the beans _ 18:39, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

16 November 2012

Temporary move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – The article has now been moved 4 times in the last 12 hours, without any discussion. Move protect until some kind of consensus is reached. The Old JacobiteThe '45 13:01, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined It's only been moved twice; one move, one revert. The other two edits were to the hatnote. Relist if it carries on. GedUK  13:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Indira Gandhi's birthday is on 19 November. Requesting 5 days (till 21 November) protection. Though you can protect it indefinitely too (we'll need it sooner or later). The article is being used to voice on and criticize Gandhi family, Indian National Congress. . Tito Dutta (talk) 10:36, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. At this stage there's not enough disruptive editing to warrant protection, and we don't protect pre-emptively. GedUK  12:58, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection. High level of IP vandalism. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Firstly, I'm not seeing vandalism. Secondly, let's just see how your removal of the table beds in; most of the recent IP edits were to that table, and now it's gone the edits might stop. If the table keeps getting put back in, then we can reconsider, though it's still not necessarily vandalism, and the consensus at the AfD was about individual articles rather than tables listing them. GedUK  13:01, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 05:01, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:53, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: from IP vandalism. Span (talk) 15:00, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:44, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Similar pages Faggot and Faggot (slang) already semi-protected, so this is now the go-to vandalism page. Jokestress (talk) 23:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long standing attempt by multiple IPs to remove content from the main article. --Perene (talk) 20:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined The most recent stuff (removal of a see-also link, is neither frequent enough, nor disruptive enough to warrant protection. They seem to be raising a valid point. The older stuff is too old to be considered. GedUK  12:36, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:24, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation protected indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:35, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101talk 15:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:39, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism by new users after protection expired in 13 November. Torreslfchero (talk) 13:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Long history of vandalism, and the previous protection was for one year. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:26, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The article has been the goal of several anon user attacks in the last 24 hours. Reckless182 (talk) 10:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:03, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection. Currently on the front page and there is an high level of IP and new user vandalism/unsouced/pov edits. -- Lihaas (talk) 09:34, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Was done fo 1 week by an admin, but no note was left here Lihaas (talk) 12:45, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 04:44, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:51, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Moderate amounts of vandalism, but lots of POV-pushing, IPs/SPAs with an agenda to remove certain viewpoints and emphasize others, and as the media revs up, you can be sure that this will only increase. Unflavoured (talk) 03:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator The Blade of the Northern Lights. GedUK  12:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Daily, high level of IP vandalism; factual errors, changes against source, defamatory content such as this, etc. Dan56 (talk) 00:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:46, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Content removal, fancruft, factual errors, etc. Dan56 (talk) 23:42, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There's been consistent vandalism in the last several days; locking it up for a while would be prudent. Go Phightins! 23:14, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. It's been protected so many times before, clearly a desirable target...it's time for indefinite semi-protection. If a large number of legitimate non-confirmed edit requests start coming in, we can re-evaluate. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:22, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Two editors reverting, concerning film's title without discussing on talk page. Torreslfchero (talk) 19:50, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Continual addition of non-notable entries for the purposes of self-promotion. . Stuartyeates (talk) 02:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. The recent flurry of activity is coming from Reddit [29], probably better to just let the edits happen for now and then review everything at a later date. I don't want to protect the page when a bunch of people are trying their best to improve it. – Steel 04:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

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

Indefinite full protection. yes i am willing to seek consensus and i have read the edit warring policy (talk) 00:11, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: Associated user has been blocked as an anonymous editor (See User:65.175.243.48‎) + Crashdoom Talk 01:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Steel 04:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Paoli Dam (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – I'm not sure what the rules are for protecting an article talk page, but one IP user has been excessively and in my opinion disruptively using the {{edit semi-protected}} tag on this talk page. All of his requests have been declined and multiple users, myself included, have attempted to explain the rules, but he still persists in making these requests. Can I get some admin eyes on the talk page to see if protection is warranted?. —KuyaBriBriTalk 17:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Probably not likely to happen given the article is semi-protected already, would be easier to issue warnings to the IP if it's just one. tutterMouse (talk) 17:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected. This person has been at it for a while. – Steel 04:44, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Susceptible to vandalism/function hijacking by anonymous users. + Crashdoom Talk 12:12, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Also, can an administrator re-create the edit notice at User:NekoBot/Config/Editnotice to contain the content in the hidden section of this comment, it would be appreciated to dissuade editors that may edit this page without consensus due to its high sensitivity.
Semi-protected and  Done – Steel 04:44, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Every single edit in the last two days has been reverted as vandalism. It seems like the page gets vandalized very frequently, but I'm not sure if it warrants indefinite semi-protection. The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 17:11, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Slon02 (talk) 19:49, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP/new user vandalism. Content removal, deliberate factual errors, etc.Dan56 (talk) 16:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Slon02 (talk) 19:48, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Frequent vandalism on the court case. If it is the same person under different ID I suspect that semi-protection will eliminate the problem. Andrew Swallow (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only two instances of vandalism this month. If the vandalism becomes more frequent please file another request. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 22:03, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

17 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism and POV edits from IP users due to the start of an ongoing controversial conflict in Gaza. FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:58, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I noticed only a few instances of questionable edits. Ruslik_Zero 17:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Alphonsewan (talk • contribs • logs) 08:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 17:48, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – long term target of IP vandalism. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Ruslik_Zero 17:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Due to Vandalism the page should be semi protected. Greatuser (talk) 10:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 17:59, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Vandalism from multiple IPs resumed after short-term semi-protection expired. Rivertorch (talk) 07:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Slon02 (talk) 19:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 06:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Slon02 (talk) 19:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is my second request in 2 days, this page is about a disputed area between India and Pakistan. Understandably, many zealous IPs are trying their best to remove controversial content indiscriminately. It's getting harder for us watchers to keep track of everything. Please semi-protect the page. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 16:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Check the logs and you'll see that this page has been protected many times and every time it's been kept unprotected IP-vandalism ensued, occasionally even by well-established users. Hence, I request that the protection be indefinite. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 16:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: An anonymous editor is persistently blanking a large sourced portion of the article without an explanation. SMS Talk 06:57, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Allow page creation: An article at AFC has been reviewed and I would like to move it into main. The AFC article is at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bin Weevils (Virtual world). Odie5533 (talk) 07:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotected Ruslik_Zero 17:34, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite move protection: Highly visible page – Over 600 transclusions. George Ho (talk) 04:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Move protected indefinitely.. I've also semi-protected it indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 07:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: This page is becoming cluttered with useless examples. I think the article is worth merit, but not in its current state. Semi-protection would help with the quality problems greatly. ChaosAkita (talk) 18:26, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Don't be shy about removing things from the list, though. If a bunch of IPs have made well-intentioned but unhelpful edits, feel free to revert them. If IPs start adding a lot of unsourced or poorly-sourced content, we might be able to consider semi-protection. Best — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 07:13, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – A highly controversial page becoming the center of focus of unhelpful anonymous IP-edits. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 17:49, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I'm only seeing one instance of blanking and one test edit in the last two weeks. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 06:54, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Currently being targeted by an IP sock of user:Nangparbat. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:25, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, bot bug. I believe I have fixed it. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 00:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Not sure about the 99 IP being Nangparbat (I think it probably is, but I'm not 100% sure). However, I've protected for a week due to all the blankings. If you think a longer protection is justified then I recommend getting someone to look at it who knows the Nangparbat socks better. Whoever that person is has my blessing to increase the protection if they think it is warranted. Or if there is more sockpuppetry after the week-long protection wears off you can file another request here and it will probably be protected for longer. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 07:30, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Currently being targeted by an IP sock of user:Nangparbat. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:25, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, bot bug. I believe I have fixed it. ‑Scottywong| babble _ 00:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 07:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Shifting-IP user is re-adding an unsourced statement about Hayes having been close friends with Jimmy Savile - an innocuous enough claim when it was originally added, but much less so now. Without a source it's a simple WP:BLP violation. McGeddon (talk) 16:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 06:58, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

User talk:GSK To Go (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite semi-protection: This is a legitimate second account. Protection requested to combat potential vandalism. GSK ● talk ● contribs 02:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Done Materialscientist (talk) 02:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: This is a legitimate second account. Protection requested to combat potential vandalism. GSK ● talk ● contribs 02:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Done Materialscientist (talk) 02:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: User request within own user space. GSK ● talk ● contribs 02:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Done Materialscientist (talk) 02:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Page is persistently vandalized by IP users. . MisterShiney ✉ 00:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Amatulic. (1 month) --Webclient101talk 01:20, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: BLP violations and vandalism. I believe I am involved. Bbb23 (talk) 00:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:41, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent non wp:rs changes by one person, muliple IPs Jim1138 (talk) 23:54, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Every time semi-protection is removed this page gets vandalized daily. TimL • talk 23:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 18 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Heavy IP/new account vandalism over the past few days. Legoktm (talk) 22:35, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:34, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Often vandalised by IP users. Mason Doering (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Frequent vandalism by IPs, often with personal attacks. The Banner talk 17:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Buggie111 (talk) 14:28, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked.. Both the IP and the other disruptive account have been blocked for 48 hours. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:57, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

18 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection. High level of IP vandalism. A week or so should be sufficient, considering the seasonal interest of this article. John M Baker (talk) 19:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for one week. Dianna (talk) 21:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, puerile IPs. 99.0.80.70 (talk) 15:19, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. JohnCD (talk) 15:26, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – repeated IP vandalism to a BLP. Ankh.Morpork 15:16, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected. Indefinite protection may be warranted, but the article has never been protected before, so we will start with a week. Dianna (talk) 21:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. BaldBoris 14:23, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for one week to start. Please re-report if the problem persists once the protection comes off. Dianna (talk) 21:16, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Jim1138 (talk) 09:46, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Gimmetrow. Odie5533 (talk) 15:16, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism from what I presume is a number of socks. Vandalism restarted less than 24 hours after the last protection expired. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 03:51, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 05:20, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite full-protection: and redirect to The_Young_Turks_(talk_show)#Co-hosts. Merger of non-notable individual keeps being reverted.--Otterathome (talk) 21:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Your best course of action is to take it to WP:AFD. Dianna (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Disruptive editing Anonymous IPs repeatedly insert chart positions that cannot be verified through sources provided. Semi-protection should prevent that from happening and hopefully will get the IPs on the talk-page and provide sources if such positions exist at all.--Harout72 (talk) 03:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 03:44, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism re Domeyko's nationality. 109.76.181.99 (talk) 14:56, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined The talk page of the person making the edit is still red, and I'm not seeing any discussion on the article talk page either. Protection is not a substitute for talking. Dianna (talk) 00:25, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: An indefinite semi-protection is ideal since only a tax professional like a Chartered Accountant can do justice with the article. There has been edits by ip's (not vandal edits) but these have compromised the factual accuracy of the article due to general misconceptions in the public who do not fully know the provisions & sections. As can be seen from the edit history of the article, I have undid a couple of such edits by giving reason therein. I am the only one expanding/updating the article, I can say from my knowledge that it would be in the interest for the readers to get this article protected. Harsh (talk) 13:18, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Two issues, this is a content dispute so not sure semi-protection would be any good given most edits are good faith in nature like you say. Second though I'm unclear on the accepted way "income tax in (country)" articles are done there seems to be a lot of out of scope information on the page that needs removing. tutterMouse (talk) 13:47, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
I was completely aware before requesting, that an article which has negligible vandal edits will ever be protected. But I still think that it would be beneficial for the readers. Changing an amount or word even slightly would become a huge blunder, in this case. Harsh (talk) 14:17, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes but for whom? Even though WP:NOT doesn't specify it, I'm going to assume "not for providing financial advice" is part of this. tutterMouse (talk) 17:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined Pages are not protected to prevent errors from being introduced. Dianna (talk) 00:21, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. JDCMAN (talk) 00:10, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for three days. The article seems to be a perennial short-term target so please feel free to come back and apply for longer protection if the activity resumes. Dianna (talk) 01:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some kids on 4chan.org/g/ have been removing entries and adding "Delaware" everywhere in the last few minutes. I propose that this page be reverted to https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=List_of_U.S._states_by_HDI&oldid=522802426 and protected for a few hours--until the thread dies and these children move on. Livingod (talk) 23:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for three days and restored last good version Dianna (talk) 01:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article has been the target of the addition of numerous unsourced edits by IP Addresses. If an indefinite duration is unnecessary, a temporary duration is mandatory. JC · Xbox · Talk · Contributions 22:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Normally we do protection in escalating durations. Please re-apply for longer protection if the activity resumes when the protection comes off. Dianna (talk) 01:02, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent vandalism from different IP users. Astros4477 (talk) 22:25, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for one week. Dianna (talk) 00:58, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: MMA event about to happen, going to be target of IP disruptive editing . Mtking (edits) 21:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

May need to consider full protection, results being added without sources in some form of wiki-race. Mtking (edits) 00:34, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for three days; the unsourced edits are coming from IPs so full protection should not be required. Dianna (talk) 00:49, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Highly visible template – This is a highly visible template that was vandalized. The vandalizer got hit with a blockstick, but I don't think this is a template that should be left alone. Izno (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. 745 transclusions. Dianna (talk) 00:46, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Repeated BLP violations. . STATic message me! 20:56, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for six months this time. Dianna (talk) 00:43, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:27, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a week.Dianna (talk) 00:39, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Edit war. (It's a controversial topic, in the Spanish Wikipedia its also semi-protected). Neo139 (talk) 20:12, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for three days to get things stable for a bit. Dianna (talk) 00:37, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Ongoing edit warring/unresolved content dispute. Polisher of Cobwebs (talk) 20:11, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for three days, which I have a feeling will not be enough time. :/ Good luck! Dianna (talk) 00:32, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent unsourced/factually incorrect/poor sourced edits from IPs. Same reason as the last request, sorry for tinkering after it became expired and unprotected. Though, Koei has even announced they asked the "leaker" to stop mass leaking information and they're changing some stuff that was leaked. I don't like risking IPs persistently adding information such as confirmed characters because the only people who can confirm them, is Koei and their magazine affiliates. Please, heed my request. --Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 19:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. There were no IP edits at all since the protection expired. Armbrust The Homonculus 20:34, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection requested. Persistent IP and POV vandalism. This page is a known vandalism magnet. Blueboar (talk) 01:17, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for one month. The page has never been protected before, so we don't jump right in with permanent protection. Dianna (talk) 00:19, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 18:58, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection - An annonymous editor is persistently adding information to the effect that Laddy Bullock was the Duchess' second cousin thrice removed. 1st diff, 2nd diff, 3rd diff. The consensus among established editors was that this trivia and had no place in the article. Martinvl (talk) 08:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined This seems to have stopped. Ruslik_Zero 18:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

19 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. SMS Talk 19:54, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Reaper Eternal. (9 days) --Webclient101talk 20:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – ip adding improperly sourced allegations.  Badgernet  ₪  16:57, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:01, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-Protection A non-registered user has been vandalizing this article, which is the bio of a living person, by making the currently false statement that Tedford has been fired as Cal's head football coach. The vandal has also added opinion rant type material, which I have reverted. Tedford's contract situation will probably be resolved within a few days. The article is currently (if temporarily) in good shape, with the vandalism removed, so I think that the best course of action would be to lock down the article for a few days, until there is a verifiable change in the real-world situation. Since this is a bio of a living person, I think the matter should be regarded as relatively important. Pechmerle (talk) 09:25, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Non-admin comment. I've already left a 3RR warning at the vandal's talk page, and will report him to WP:AN3 if he reverts again (he's only made two straight reverts so far, but he had two quasi-reverts before, so I'm going to apply the spirit of WP:3RR, as well as the non-3RR edit war policy). Unless other users start adding untrue/POV information (or vandalism in general), I see no reason to prevent editors from improving the article for the sake of one offender who'll presumably be blocked if he reverts again. — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 09:41, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined. I did actually semi-protect this briefly, but on reflection Francophonie&Androphilie is quite right - it would be better to deal with this by blocking, should that become necessary. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:07, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the responsiveness. Page seems stable at the moment, so I hope this works out. Pechmerle (talk) 23:38, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – Autoarbitaster (talk · contribs) repeatedly removes the redirect with a POV (pro-Palestinian) blurb. . Cyclopiatalk 10:28, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 12:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated, by numerous accounts. 99.0.80.70 (talk) 02:18, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Two deletes were G7, and one was A7. No need at the moment; if really recreated repeatedly in a short span of time, please repeat the request. Lectonar (talk) 12:24, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP protection needed, due to the current UN war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia expose... http://www.nolanchart.com/article9961-gotovina-and-markac-acquittal-exposes-ictys-political-agenda.html. WhiteWriterspeaks 14:40, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Whilst there's been a small amount of disruptive editing, most of the most recent IP edits seem fine and haven't been reverted. GedUK  12:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection. As you can see here, James's user page has been hit with vandalism (generally personal attacks) from 6 IPs so far (all now blocked), apparently run by the same puppetmaster. A triple threat of high volume, high incivility, and, given that it's a user page, essentially no reason that IPs need be able edit it. While the vandal's hit his talk page in the past, he's done it far less extensively than to the mainpage, and since James is an admin who deals with IPs fairly frequently on RCP, I think it would be best to hold off on protecting the talk page, and seeing if the vandal moves there or not. As for my page, the vandal only hit it twice (also personal attacks, though they just made me laugh - please don't suppress the revisions!), but since no one else has any need to edit it, and since it might be their first target when they see that James's page is protected, I'd request a fairly short-term semi-protection - probably no more than a few hours, just to head off a potential immediate response.

Depending how determined this vandal is, this could go a lot of different ways from here on out, so unless they tire themselves out, there's a good chance this won't be the last request made on the matter. (There've been no vandalisms on my page or James's for about 20 minutes, but after the first wave of IPs got blocked, it was about 30 minutes until the second - changing proxies, perhaps?) — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 14:26, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Both Semi-protected for a period of 12 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 14:31, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Please protect this article, because IP-adresses are vandals in the call-out order. KIRILL95 (talk) 12:42, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:56, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Annoying IP vandalism/addition of unsourced content. STATic message me! 09:20, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Apparently two users have teamed up to add-up a bunch of controversial material, which have been challenged by many users, talk ungoing, WP:EW has to stop. Tachfin (talk) 09:10, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:49, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Persistent vandalism on article page. Editor now seems intent on vandalizing my talk page, too. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 20:54, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I removed the combined broken markup for your talkpage, if you require protection for it in addition (though I don't see an issue a block could solve) then you'd be better off requesting it separately from the article. tutterMouse (talk) 22:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. It doesn't look like protection is necessary for User talk:Dominus Vobisdu just yet. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: High level of persistent vandalism: removing appropriate content and adding speculative/inappropriate content. Spidey104 19:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Disruptive editing Anonymous IPs (especially one) keep introducing incorrect chart information as well as non-existent certifications. Semi-protection should help us prevent the constant disruption that the page has been experiencing for some days now.--Harout72 (talk) 16:33, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit warring by IP user. Please see page history and the talk page of the concerned IP user. . E4024 (talk) 13:53, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Please note that the map, which is the object of controversy, is awating deletion by an admin. --E4024 (talk) 17:35, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
And an IP hopping user (sock?) reverting and reverting... --E4024 (talk) 22:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Semi-protection wouldn't be fair on the IPs in this case, as registered editors are involved, and I can't see a discussion on the talk page that establishes consensus. It would be helpful if someone started the talk page discussion, rather than leaving messages on an non-fixed IP's talk page. GedUK  12:34, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Requestor is acting on behalf Bill Turnbull Gary Apedaile (talk) 23:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 06:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Edit-warring and uncivil POV-pushing by anon-IP. GiW (talk) 20:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 06:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Content dispute/edit warring Scepo13 (talk) 16:02, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 06:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism/ edit wars. Ixrs (talk) 00:29, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined, Seems to have stopped. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 06:02, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 05:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 06:00, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: I believe the protection duration of this article should be reduced. I do know that it has been a target of persistent vandalism in the past (due to the fact that the subject was in the media more), so much so that the last protection was beefed up to a year. However, the current onslaught of vandalism is due to an event that occurred on November 17 (Cole deleting his Tumblr, to much controversy). I believe that this event will roll over in an amount of time much shorter than the current year-long protection (maybe in a month or so at most?), after which point the protection will mostly serve to deter good faith IP/new editors, IMO. - Purplewowies (talk) 05:19, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected. by another admin. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 06:01, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Okay. Fine. Where should I discuss/request something like this, since this doesn't seem to be the right venue? (To clarify, I knew the article was protected already, but I was asking about changing its duration.) - Purplewowies (talk) 08:07, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
I can understand the want for the protection to be shorter but it's had two year long protections prior to this one and I'm surprised this article wasn't protected indefinitely given the long protection history due to vandalism. Though the controversy will die down soon, there's still several underlying and persistent issues which would make a reduction pointless as it usually is protected within a few months of a semi-prot expiring. tutterMouse (talk) 09:35, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Occasional vandalism/potential for vandalism. There is no need for any IP or brand new user to edit my user space pages. Binksternet (talk) 03:40, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Done
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 03:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Binksternet (talk) 03:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 12 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Should be enough time for them to give up. Acroterion (talk) 03:27, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism from IPs. -- Mason Doering talk 02:26, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: The two IP users who were adding vandalism have been blocked. --Webclient101talk 03:09, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 03:11, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Wii U is released in North America today. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 18:50, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Most of the IP edits are good ones. This is one way we attract new editors is to let them participate in hot news stories. Please re-report if the situation worsens. Dianna (talk) 21:19, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – See also what I talk about at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard - this isn't only happening here. Lugia2453 (talk) 23:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. JohnCD (talk) 23:34, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. JetBlast (talk) 23:10, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Done by another admin. ☮Soap☮ 01:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of recent IP vandalism. §h₳un 9∞76 15:06, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for six months. Dianna (talk) 21:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

20 November 2012

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Zad68 20:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, 72 hours of semi-protection would be enough. Mentoz86 (talk) 20:56, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 21:44, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – WP:BLP concerns, persistent & recent/ongoing vandalism. Shearonink (talk) 04:19, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:43, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:38, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:57, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article under attack! Help needed quickly, please. Hertz1888 (talk) 15:12, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. I've rangeblocked the IPs. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:01, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: seems to be a favorite target for a steady flow of IP vandalism. —Torchiest talkedits 13:55, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Rjd0060 (talk) 18:48, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Move protection: The page has been moved twice in the last 4 days. Both moves were controversial, but for the first move (November 15 at 22:26 and 22:26) it was neither entered into the Requests for Controversial Moves listing, nor opened for discussion in the article's Talk page, nor explained via the edit summary field (field was left blank). Subsequent to this I moved the page back to its original title, Cuerpo de Bomberos de Puerto Rico, with the help of an administrator via a request at Requests for Technical Moves (HERE and HERE). Then the page was moved again today (November 19 at 13:26). This second move also ignored listing it at the RCM page as well as opening a discussion at the article's Talk page; it did have an edit summary stating "naming conventions". But actually, per Naming Conventions (at WP:TITLE), the page title should follow the most prevalent use in reliable English-language sources. According to Google Scholar (17 to 1), Google News (1 to 0), and Google Search (164,000 to 2,390), the name "Cuerpo de Bomberos de Puerto Rico" is vastly more prevalent in the reliable English language literature than the name it was moved to (Puerto Rico Fire Corps). In any event, the move had already been stated to be controversial and the editor doing the move should have followed protocol by opening up the intended move for discussion and consensus. I request the page be move-protected, at least until that time when the editors can all come together and discuss the matter rather than moving the page without seeking consensus. Mercy11 (talk) 01:43, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Move protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. JohnCD (talk) 18:55, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated anon vandalism of BLP. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:27, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| gossip _ 19:18, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism and personal attacks on talk page by trolling IP; see also this link. Cindy(talk to me) 01:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Some of the content getting removed seems more like a content dispute than blatant vandalism. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Warring over persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content that fails to comply with WP:VERIFY. Jetstreamer Talk 21:57, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. JohnCD (talk) 18:35, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Content dispute/edit warring Scepo13 (talk) 22:53, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. As per before. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:05, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism by IP users immediately after removal of page protection. Areaseven (talk) 15:53, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:58, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation protected Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – or if an admin can watch the page, now that both the editors have been warned about edit warring. Please also take a look at the contribution histories of the following articles:

--SMS Talk 17:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Since it's just two editors, consider taking it to WP:AN3 to have them blocked should they start up again. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:57, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Oxfordwang (talk) 16:32, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:51, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Article was at one time several months ago better cited than it was now due to unexplained removal of cited content by IP numbers not registered as Wikipedia profiles. Zastavafan76 (talk) 08:20, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Looking at the article history, semi-protection would be of no use (as there was virtually no real vandalism), and we usually do not protect preemptively or to keep the article at a certain status-quo. Lectonar (talk) 11:56, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Full protection: Was semi-protected due to repeated vandalism, now the vandals are just making silly minor edits to just get enough edits to get them around the semi-protection. 216.93.234.239 (talk) 00:58, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I only see one vandal doing this recently, and he recently had the "edit" permission removed from his userrights. In general, I don't think we need full protection because of vandalism, because someone who puts effort into getting a vandalism-only account to be autoconfirmed will quickly be found and blocked. Thank you for watching this page! Nyttend (talk) 12:20, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Last protection was not enough, vandalism still continuing. . Webclient101talk 00:35, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:06, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 21:32, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 21:24, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – repeated Vandalism since SP was lifted on November 2. SMP0328. (talk) 20:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:00, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Return of sock puppetry vandalism. Was protected in past for 2 weeks, 30 days. If possible, 90 day semi-protect. Msw1002 (talk) 19:36, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:59, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. multiple editors Jim1138 (talk) 02:51, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: Both of the IP's have been blocked. --Webclient101talk 03:28, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 09:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Personal attacks by editor using dynamic IP address. . Cindy(talk to me) 01:30, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for one month. Swarm X 11:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article has been prone to, vandalism by anonymous users lately. . Clarkcj12 (talk) 18:51, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:16, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Too much fans attacking and ruining the page. Its becoming much like a fan fiction page. The page itself is currently being reviewed and fans are making getting from bad to worse. Needs immediate protection. Thank You. Godzilladude123 (talk) 04:12, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I want to say that I think Godzilladude123 is making too much of recent edits to the article. In fact, I did some recent cleanup to the article to remove a hefty chunk of original research, fancruft, and non-notable info as well as some layout that he has reverted. Not much editing has actually occurred in the article in recent weeks, if you view the article history. You can argue that there's disagreement about content, but I see no reason for page protection. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:37, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
It's (almost) a content dispute, not an issue that semi-protection would resolve. I'd advise taking it to the talkpage to hammer things out rather than continual reverting. As for protection from actual vandalism and not just good faith editing from the wrong people, I'm not seeing much to justify a protection for any length of time. tutterMouse (talk) 08:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
I agree with tutterMouse Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Lectonar (talk) 09:13, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Amartyabag TALK2ME 07:27, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation protected Lectonar (talk) 09:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – The changes to the knicks 2010- present era. ElectroPro (talk) 20:11, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. There isnt even enough recent activity to call this an edit war.—Bagumba (talk) 00:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Binksternet (talk) 16:40, 19 November 2012 (UTC) Persistent BLP violations'. Binksternet (talk) 22:08, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:14, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A photo has been placed on the website that shows a strong outline of the man's penis. A discussion has been started on the talk page with no one responding. Deadspin.com has done a story about the photo that is bringing a lot of attention and vandalism from anons to the article. OlYeller21Talktome 03:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:04, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:05, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-preotection: Continued edit war between different unregistered users. --RJFF (talk) 16:31, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 21:50, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

21 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An anonymous editor from Greece has been coming to the article and making small changes without comment. Occasionally, they're right. Usually they're wrong and without knowing why the changes were made, it's hard to determine motive. 10 days please. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked.. The IP has been blocked for 31 hours, but feel free to make another request if they start IP hopping. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Bad call. This is the editor's fifth IP in just over two weeks.
  • 2012-11-12 2.85.21.223
  • 2012-11-13 2.85.46.30
  • 2012-11-13 2.85.51.167
  • 2012-11-14 2.85.46.30
  • 2012-11-17 2.85.46.30
  • 2012-11-17 85.196.8.66
  • 2012-11-21 85.196.8.56
I suspect that I will be back when the anon is. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:39, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. That's some pretty convincing evidence - thanks for posting it, it definitely helps with the reviewing. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:01, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite full protection: Persistent vandalism – This article has been vandalized by numerous IPs for more than 6 months now. They have been adding entries such as results from other Big Loser versions to this page which are really inappropriate (See page history for this). If ever, I would to request to prohibit IPs from editing this article indefinitely. Renzoy16 | Contact Me 13:54, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined There's not nearly enough activity to justify semi-protection. THere's been only about 1 instance per month in the last sixth months. All articles face small amounts of vandalism; there must be regular, persistent problem to justify semi-protection. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:41, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: So I can edit the page... →Bmusician 09:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotected Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Just curious. Why was the page protected earlier? I see no content on the page -- Tinu Cherian - 17:16, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection. Edit warring between non-autoconfirmed users. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour (have a chat) 02:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Note - in case anyone wasn't sure, the requesting account is my alternate account. I originally investigated this article because of this request on my talk page. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated POV blanking of sourced content over the last month by a morphing IP. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:59, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:16, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandals have been vandalizing the page for quite a while; could be lifted at the time of The X Factor's finale. NFLisAwesome (ZappaOMati's alternate account) 01:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:08, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101talk 23:41, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:59, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semiprotection Duration probably 2 weeks. Shorter would be less effective. The gentleman who is the subject of the article was executed this morning. unconstructive IP only edits are already starting to flood in. This is an area where partisan views are held very strongly and drive by edits are prevalent. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:51, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I was going to request it myself when Twinkle told me it was already there. Agreed, people will use the page as a battleground. It has happened to other articles earlier and I'm led to believe that it will happen here too. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:18, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
The logs and the article history show that a short period of semiprotection allows impulsive edits to cool in this article and that tranquility is restored until the next media-fest or incident. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:21, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Agreed. However, the next media fest may not happen since the subject is no more. I don't think the press can write much about him for more than a week or two. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:25, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 Done by User:Tinucherian for 1 week! Rsrikanth05, aren't you an admin? I was expecting you to protect it! --Tito Dutta (talk) 10:56, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

No, I'm not. If I were, I'd be swamped. :) --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple vandals, mostly anons, targetting this page. Stephenb (Talk) 08:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism, in extreme amounts. Statυs (talk) 22:09, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism; deliberate factual errors, content removal, etc. Dan56 (talk) 04:55, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It's only the third protection, and the last one was for three days - a bit early for indefinite protection. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:56, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Unprotected, as there didn't seem to be a particularly valid reason for full protection in the first place. That said, this isn't necessarily a license for you to implement your desired change. While I think your point is probably the most reasonable option for that page, please contribute to (and abide by) the ongoing RfD rather than altering it while the discussion is ongoing. Swarm X 11:58, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Since the vandal is threatening to switch IP after his block, a short protection may be the simplest option.--McSly (talk) 03:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC) McSly (talk) 03:23, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. (Threats are surely not the reason though) Materialscientist (talk) 03:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Very controversial man, page has been protected before and I would say needs it again. C. 22468 Talk to me 13:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:05, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Highly visible template – This article is a candidate for TFA on 8 December. I am requesting PP through 9 December so we can assure the quality of the recently promoted FA is maintained. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 02:04, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Which template do you mean? Note that we don't semiprotect today's featured article (or tomorrow's, or the next day's, etc.) based purely on a presumption of vandalism. Nyttend (talk) 12:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection to drive toward discussion on the talk page. There is a new user who is engaged in POV-pushing. I have no desire to seek a block and removing a potentially valuable contributor. Semi-protection should encourage discussion on the talk page. Buffs (talk) 20:31, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Not looking for anything longer than 72 hours. Buffs (talk) 21:41, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:28, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Wasn't really looking for full protection. I'm not going to edit it until we get this straightened out. Buffs (talk) 22:41, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Never mind, I see where you are going with this. Much appreciated. Buffs (talk) 22:43, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection from vandalism. A week would be good. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:14, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:18, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite full protection against creation (Indefinite permanent salting): This is a libellous story promoted, or paddled, by David Icke – a British conspiracy-theorist, in England – being a case of defamation surrounding unfounded, unreliable, unsafe or false allegations of sexual abuse of a mentally-handicapped person (or, a person with learning disabilities) not of full capacity, in Scotland. No reason for the resurrection of the article exists whatsoever, not even by auto-confirmed editing users. The present protection is both insufficient and inadequate. -- KC9TV 19:10, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The page was last created more than two years ago. The semi seems sufficient. Armbrust The Homonculus 19:53, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring due to a recent Huffington Post article posted by Jim regarding Singapore and the Israel-Arab conflict. Perhaps until the the controversy dies down. Hopefullymorecorrect (talk) 14:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Comment: The IP edits all originate from Singapore, understandably as it has touch some raw nerves there. Attempts to engage the IP editors by asking them to refer to TALK in the edit summaries are of limited help, as they do not seem to understand WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, [WP:NOTSOAPBOX]] and in their insistence to add the content to the intro rather than another section, possibly WP:MOS as well. I'm suggesting maybe a 2 week protection, or at the very least 1 week until the furor and activism dies down. Zhanzhao (talk) 19:23, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of four days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:13, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – A day or maybe two days should be enough to stop the looming editwar and get everybody to the talkpage. The Banner talk 09:08, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of one day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Edit warring by IPs Jim1138 (talk) 05:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:53, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

22 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated deletion of content by single IP editor claiming that consensus is on his side when he has been the only person pushing this point of view. . Bob Re-born (talk) 20:17, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Swarm X 20:27, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of recent vandalism. §h₳un 9∞76 19:28, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Swarm X 20:29, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Seems like a disruptive IP is targeting it, requesting semi. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 16:55, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 13:44, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I just see one IP causing all of the problems; the solution in that situation is WP:AIV. Nyttend (talk) 15:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 13:44, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nyttend (talk) 15:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi for maybe a couple of weeks. Too much BLP-violating material being inserted by IP's and redlinks. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:43, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Article in slow Edit war since a week, whose speed is increasing. Participants are discussing on the talk page, and at the same time reverting. So a full protection for 3 or 4 days will give them time to discuss. Both users are autoconfirmed so I request Full protection. Make sure the last edit before fullprotecting it is my edit (I will comment/hide the whole section causing problems, so neither side views is visible while the page is frozen). Neo139 (talk) 15:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Also I have to mention the topic is highly controversial and political. There was also full protection for a week on the same article in the Spanish Wikipedia.--Neo139 (talk) 15:21, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nyttend (talk) 16:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Announcement of a major discovery by the Mars Science Laboratory will prompt speculation about whether it has found life on Mars, whether it is living or fossilized, and other such talk that is not conducive to the purpose of this wiki. After the announcement in a few weeks of this discovery (possibly of life) the number of self-proclaimed prophets editing these pages will grow dramatically, reducing the factual accuracy of the articles previously mentioned. Wer900 • talk • coordinationconsensus defined 00:37, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:09, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent IP disruptive edits/vandalism that make the article factually inaccurate.Spylab (talk) 22:47, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I wouldn't call those edits vandalism as defined at WP:VANDAL - it looks more like a good-faith attempt to trim down the lead section to me. This really needs to be discussed at the article's talk page before we can consider protection. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Hindu Muslim dispute on wiki on the illegal structure built at the base of Char minar . Shabiha 19:54, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:55, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Extremely high level of IP vandalism, especially in regards to false information on DLC. Likely to be a target for quite a while. 85.210.182.9 (talk) 00:04, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: I'm seeing a high level of unsourced edits but not a high level of vandalism, other than some blankings from an IP that could be blocked if they continue. However, I'm not sure what you're referring to with the "false information of DLC" comment. Could you maybe provide a couple of diffs? Thanks — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:05, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined. IP edits seem mostly constructive. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent unconstructive editing by IP editors. SMS Talk 19:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:19, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Permanent semi-protection: While the current entry has yet to be vandalized, the previous incarnation of this entry (Unji) was subjected to a whole series of page blankings and various vandalizations. (See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unji for some of the details, as well as the histories of Unji's main and talk pages.) I'm going to suggest a pre-emptive strike against any potential attempts to re-create past information as well as any potential vandalizing of the disambiguation page and prevent IPs from editing the disambiguation page. It probably wouldn't be a bad idea to protect Unji at the same time, to prevent anyone from attempting to recreate the previous entry there as well.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 15:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Lectonar (talk) 09:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: Pre-emptively blocked (which doesnt happen here) and unilaterally as well for an indefinate time. Dont even understand the reason there.Lihaas (talk) 11:25, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

1 week! See concerns above! --Tito Dutta (talk) 11:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
(after edit conflict) the log shows it has been temporarily semiprotected for a period of 1 week The request rationale was simply that today the gentleman was executed and that unconstructive drive by edits by IP editors had already started to arrive. 1 Week seems entirely reasonable for such edits to cool down after the media feeding frenzy is over. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Woop, sorry ;) I read indefiniate so was concerned.Lihaas (talk) 15:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Fiddle Faddle for explaining and No problems, Lihaas. I was informed of the request off-wiki by users and I did. Edit protection was semi for 1 week and Only Move was indefinite. Hope that clarfies -- Tinu Cherian - 17:13, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Not unprotected, procedural. Lectonar (talk) 09:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and bad edits over the last few hours by unregistered users (specifically since the series ended), as seen here --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:23, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection, vandalism continues as protection drops. 117Avenue (talk) 06:26, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:29, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Unsalt to allow redirection to Pogo#Music {{r from incomplete disambiguation}}; the section currently lists two musicians, DJ Pogo and Pogo (electronic musician). (If you consider one to be a primary topic, please explain.) --SoledadKabocha (talk) 22:30, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotected — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:51, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Resumption of vandalism after expiry of protection - volatile current event. Begoon talk 11:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Appears to be picking up a bit more vandalism, maybe due to holiday boredom in the US. VQuakr (talk) 06:43, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 11:25, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term vandalism. -- Luke (Talk) 04:42, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I don't see quite enough history to jump to indefinite, but could easily do so if it resumes again later. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:20, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Disruptive editing Unsourced statements are being inserted by an IP who's been a regular in disrupting the page in the past. Seems like he/she just discovered that the semi-protection has expired.--Harout72 (talk) 04:03, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:17, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Extended Semi-protection: Persistent long-term sockpuppetry. A banned user returns to edit this article under various IP addresses about every week or two. Chubbles (talk) 02:20, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Frequent IP vandalism. Widr (talk) 23:07, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection. Persistent vandalism by IP's adding a death. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:54, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:59, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Quite a lot of vandalism for a template. §h₳un 9∞76 18:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Question for other admins: could this be a candidate for indefinite semi-protection? If this was an article I'd decline the request as not enough disruptive activity to warrant protection. Also, it only has four transclusions, only two of which are in article space. However, it is transcluded on United Kingdom, which is indefinitely semi-protected. Would this count as being "high-visibility"? I'm not confident enough of that to protect it just now, although I personally think protection would be a good idea. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:26, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Funny, I was asking myself the same thing...and did refrain from protection. I'll do it now. Lectonar (talk) 10:30, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected Lectonar (talk) 10:31, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection. Keep as a standalone article — article was redirected to Puerto Rico (proposed state) when it should clearly stand on its own. There's an ongoing discussion on its talk page. Requesting protection in the meantime to avoid redirects. Topic is highly controversial. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 17:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Or, in fact, I could just revert you. You can't overrule consensus with some vague alphabet-soup handwaving. If you want to keep discussing it to show that consensus has changed, go ahead, but the consensus discussion stands for now. Note that this wasn't "WP:NOTDEMOCRACY", it was a unanimous (though not largely participated in) discussion. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:00, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Moderate intermittent vandalism. §h₳un 9∞76 16:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Very intermittent but by no means frequent enough to justify semi-protection, what little there is though seems under control. tutterMouse (talk) 17:39, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I agree with TutterMouse--once or twice a month is not enough to justify any length of semi-protection, except in rare cases (usually BLPs). Qwyrxian (talk) 01:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: Page has been indef semi-protected for probably a year and a half (most of its life). It used to get a lot of vandalism but hasn't recently. The article has also improved significantly since it was protected so it is no longer as attractive to POV pushers and vandals. It also has more watchers than it did before. I'm sure it will still get the occasional "cult" edit or "Mormons"-->"Morons" vandalism, but that's easily reverted. If it gets really bad I'll probably be back. ~Adjwilley (talk) 16:59, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Not unprotected The reason it has not been recently vandalized is because of the semi-protection. I'm not willing to lower protection on an article like this. Horologium (talk) 04:03, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: - there have been a number of edits made to the article by anonymous IPs - in particular the section about Schori's tenure as presiding Bishop. Whenever these edits are reverted another anonymous IP reverts those edits and puts the paragraph about her tenure back in. I think to keep the edit war from continuing semi protection would be useful. 47of74 (talk) 14:59, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined; there's no ongoing discussion on the talk page and the IPs have red user talk pages. Please attempt to discuss the proposed changes with the other people. Protection is not a substitute for discussion. Dianna (talk) 00:19, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Fails WP:NSONGS but its not stopping new/unexperienced users or IPs from creating the article. — Oz (talk) 03:59, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined; please first try talking to these users regarding why you have been reverting them. The user talk pages are still red. Protection is not a substitute for discussion, and new users might not know how to look at an edit summary to collect information. Thanks. Dianna (talk) 00:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: IPs vandalising and adding false information. Also this person recently won a television music competition. — Oz (talk) 03:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. There seems to be a lot of useful edits too. This is how we attract new editors. Please try to discuss things with the editors. Thanks Dianna (talk) 00:07, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A bunch if I.Ps are vandalizing it. §h₳un 9∞76 16:47, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for three days.Dianna (talk) 00:42, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism from a variety of IPs spanning the last few weeks. . Zad68 16:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Good article; core material. Dianna (talk) 00:39, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – IPs adding incorrect information. Hack (talk) 15:25, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks.Dianna (talk) 00:31, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: from assorted IP vandalism. Span (talk) 13:49, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Dianna (talk) 00:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Recurring, rampant vandalism by multiple IPs over the past few weeks.Ppt1973 (talk) 13:30, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for one month. Dianna (talk) 00:13, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection - high traffic article, attracts a lot of test/vandalism edits, which are disruptive. Has peaked again today for one reason or another and takes effort to keep sorting. Thanks ツ Jenova20 (email) 12:22, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for three months. Dianna (talk) 00:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Full Protection - I don't know if this is the right place to put this. The article was semi-protected but now I am requesting to change the protection level to "full protection" since registered users are now adding the unsourced content (not only IPs). Thanks! Snoozlepet (talk) 05:22, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Not likely, there's only been two incidences of unsourced content being reverted by yourself since the semi-protection began and they're not exactly bad faith in nature so locking down the article simply to prevent what isn't vandalism feels like overkill. Full protection is pretty much a last resort sort of scenario, might want to just revert as necessary. tutterMouse (talk) 09:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined. What TutterMouse said. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Every other edit is a registered user reverting vandalism by an IP. This is becoming a big time sink. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:28, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks to start; the article has not actually been protected for this reason before, so we start small and work our way up if need be. Dianna (talk) 23:52, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Highly visible template – No vandalism yet, but heavily covered salacious news story. . Gaijin42 (talk) 21:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: . This isn't a template, it's an article, and we don't protect articles pre-emptively. I'll leave this open for a little while, though, as it does seem very likely that it could be vandalised today, given the news story. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 21:58, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined. I'm not seeing enough vandalism to warrant protection just now. Feel free to file again if the level of vandalism increases. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

23 November 2012

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is not a re-post of a deleted article, it was a new article that adheres to Wikipedia's policy on notability. JosephDann (talk) 11:41, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Sorry, but I'm not clear what you're asking for; I can protect the article to prevent it being recreated, but it's only existed twice so that's not enough and seems counter to what you seem to be asking for. The article's already been deleted following an AfD decision. If you think that was a bad close, you should raise it with the admin concerned (JamesBWatson (talk · contribs)), or take it to deletion review. GedUK  13:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Ah, OK, I think you're asking for it to be unprotected. Nevertheless, the resolutions are the same, speak to the admin/DRV. GedUK  13:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism.

Declined Am I missing something? The Reunion hasn't been edited by an IP for about a fortnight, and the most recent edits to The Healing don't seem to be disruptive. GedUK  13:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - Unregistered IPs keeps vandalising the Upcoming Releases section in the article without proof of source. Alphonsewan (talk) 06:39, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  13:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)


Temporary semi-protection: Persistent marketing, limited sections), multiple issues with unethical edits according to talk page.[30].--Jackson Peebles (talk) 08:14, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It's pretty infrequent and sporadic, and temporary protection is unlikely to be effective at this stage. Relist if it substantially picks up. GedUK  13:05, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit war where both parties appear to be editing in good faith, and have not violated 3RR. User:Anastacia599 has repeatedly attempted to insert a poorly written, though not entirely useless revision; User:46.7.175.108 has erroneously labeled them as vandalism, and has said in two edit summaries "you're not winning" - a WP:OWN and WP:EW violation. Anastacia599 is autoconfirmed, so I think that, instead of taking two good-faith editors to AN3, it would be better to lock this page down for a few days until these two can cool down; I'm giving both of them edit-warring warnings. (No other editors have made any major contributions in some time.). — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 04:05, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

(Oh, and I also gave the IP a {{uw-notvand}} warning.) — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 04:11, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined I disagree. Protection should be the last resort, and where it's only two people, better to work with/sanction them than protect the whole article. GedUK  13:03, 23 November 2012 (UTC)


Talk:Neuro-linguistic programming (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – During a sock puppet case (involving at least two IPs), another new IP added in an apparent attempt to disrupt.[31]. SummerPhD (talk) 04:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It needs to be a lot more than that to warrant protection. GedUK  13:02, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – might be a good idea to place a temp protection, QPR football club sacked their manager, and although no official statement has been made by the club, some people insist on doing numerous edits which could get out of hand, might be a safe idea for a small 48 hour protection. Govvy (talk) 14:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 14:19, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect until new manager appointed. Thank you. JMHamo (talk) 14:03, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Same reasons as I said with Harry Redknapp above should apply here also. Govvy (talk) 14:26, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 14:36, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Controversial topic. Neutrality of the article can be better achieved if editing is limited to registered users. IPs tend to add material not related or irrelevant to the rest of the article that ignore matters discussed in the talk section in the past. Also, sporadic vandalism by IPs. BlueLotusLK (talk) 20:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The Unicorn article has been indefinite semi-protected since 2010. This disambiguation page has had 3 semi-protections in 2012; see here

  • 31 Jan 2012 - 7 days
  • 18 Feb 2012 - 14 days
  • 14 Mar 2012 - 6 months

This last protection expired in September. The page has seen a recurring series of reverts to remove recurring vandalism since then without any net change to the article diff. Without indefinite protection, the disambiguation page seems destined to remain a persistent vandalism target consuming the time of multiple editors to fix. . SBaker43 (talk) 11:27, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 18 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:32, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the prompt resonse. SBaker43 (talk) 11:35, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Torreslfchero (talk) 09:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:12, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Continuing disruption. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Justice Forever. . Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 23:07, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:27, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Most IP/new edits are users trying to submit their article here. Protection (and a better editnotice, which I will also propose) will prevent that. Legoktm (talk) 05:33, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Good call. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:23, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Frequent IP vandalism. Widr (talk) 22:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Wave of vandalism. Mark91it's my world 20:54, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Kaldari. Armbrust The Homonculus 11:13, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – BLP violations, IPs adding death rumors without any sources provided. . Torreslfchero (talk) 09:11, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected by Scott MacDonald (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for 7 days. tutterMouse (talk) 09:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Dodo is being serially vandalized (WP:SNEAKY and obvious) by User:Hackerwill and a variety of IPs. I cannot keep up, especially since rollback is not working well tonight and I'm going to bed! I think a semi-protection of the last good version would be helpful. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 40 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:04, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Every other edit for the past month is a registered user reverting an IP. Please save us the time of having to spend the first hours of our editing reverting IPs doing damage to the project. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:05, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:08, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog "PINGAS" meme added to the article repeatedly over the past few years. There's no reason this page needs editing, so there's nothing to lose with full protection. Six Sided Pun Vows (talk | contribs | former account) 19:55, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected Nothing productive in the last year, so it's going to be another year until we can have problems. Nyttend (talk) 20:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.. I only count 4 disruptive edits all year including the "PINGAS" addition you're referring to, which has only happened once this year. The rest are vandalism that has all been caught. Swarm X 20:22, 22 November 2012 (UTC) Will defer to Nyttend on this one.--Swarm X 21:30, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: One or more IP users (I think it's the same person under a different IP every time) keeps edit warring over adding two update games to the character table at the top of the article which just pointlessly clutters the page. They have been reverted several times already by myself and other users. They have been completely ignoring what we say in our edit summaries. Kokoro20 (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: If this is about edit warring, Have you consdiered visiting the Edit Warring noticeboard? John F. Lewis (talk) 20:19, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 604800 seconds, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. WP:AN3 would probably just end up protecting this page. It's basically one person with lots of IP addresses who's editwarring with several registered users, and the registered users are the ones in the right. AN3 only really works when all participants are static IPs or registered users, while since you can't effectively block a dynamic IP, the only real option is semiprotection. Nyttend (talk) 21:04, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Also Josephson effect (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Semi-protection: an IP editor from different IPs adds a piece of fringe theory, which has been removed by several good-faith editors. At least one IP received a warning from me. The editor does not communicate other than re-inserting the piece. No other recent IP edits.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:51, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Swarm X 20:32, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:43, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

24 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – After not being edited for a week, this article has undergone 23 revisions in the half-hour preceding the most recent one, consisting solely of vandalism and reversions thereof. (There has been, for whatever reason, a cessation since 19:03, but there's no reason to think it will be lasting.) Multiple IPs and one newly-registered account, running essentially the entire gamut of vandalism genres. — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 19:14, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 19:31, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism from multiple sockpuppets of User:Mangoeater1000. Refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mangoeater1000 and its archives to comprehend the magnitude of the problem. In addition, the user has had an increase of hostility towards my persona. Thank you. Marco Guzman, Jr  Talk  18:44, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected. *current sock is auto-confirmed). Courcelles 19:34, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection - Lots of IP vandalism on the occasion of the annual game. 36 or 48 hours would probably do the trick. JohnInDC (talk) 18:43, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 12 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. As soon as the game is over, this will be pretty much done, anyhow. Courcelles 19:36, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A long an persistent history of vandalism by IP editors. Semi protection - temporary initially - would help address this, and if it reoccurs then we could go for permanent. . Biker Biker (talk) 09:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

That's a clear case for indefinite semi-protection, wonder why so many admins pussyfooted around it and kept giving several paltry week long protections. Even a year seems short looking at the history, other articles have been indef semi-prot'd for much less. tutterMouse (talk) 10:50, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Indefinite protections are reserved for only the most serious of cases, according to WP:ROUGH. However, this article has a long protection history and a highly viewed article. -- Luke (Talk) 14:06, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected indefinitely. Doing anything less is just wasting time Courcelles 19:38, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: High level of disruptive edits by IPs in light of ongoing UKIP / foster care controversy. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Consistent npov reversion . Twobells (talk) 12:15, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

comment Twobells is edit warring. Semi-protection would do nothing as it's auto-confirmed users reverting their changes. GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 12:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
(e/c) Comment: This is a clear case of edit warring by Twobells, to introduce material for which there is no consensus, and starting from a position of describing the article as "the most POV article ever". WP:BOOMERANG may be relevant. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:23, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 12:32, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. FunkyCanute (talk) 11:26, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:30, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Excessive predicting, wishful thinking, whatnot, by IP editors that are most likely schoolchildren with too much time on their hands during US Thanksgiving holiday vacations. Recommend temporary semi, at least through the weekend, if not through remainder of show's season. McDoobAU93 06:08, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 90 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dreadstar ☥ 06:36, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Uptick in IP vandalism, especially in past three days. Dl2000 (talk) 05:21, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dreadstar ☥ 06:37, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Disruptive editing every four hours since previous protection expired. Dubious addition, unsourced, fictitious addition, using existing reference in the article to cite something made up ([32]) In another case, two IPs made the same disruptive change, here, subsequently reverted as listings are alphabetical (Template talk:Infobox album), and then here, showing a suspect pattern. Dan56 (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 30 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dreadstar ☥ 06:39, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Harout72 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection Vandalism An upset IP unable to edit the article for which I requested a page protection for, is now vandalizing my User Page (already semi-protected) and now my talk-page. Please semi-protect it for at least two weeks. Thanks.--Harout72 (talk) 02:01, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – User talk pages are not protected except in response to severe or continued vandalism. However, I have User(s) blocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:42, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Jim1138 (talk) 06:16, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dreadstar ☥ 06:33, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: An IP-hopping user with a long history of disrupting this article is active again. - Cal Engime (talk) 03:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

And let's not forget sockpuppetry. He/she does that too. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected indefinitely. Courcelles 03:13, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Newest pages of edit history filled with reverts and unconstructive edits. -- Luke (Talk) 16:10, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nyttend (talk) 02:55, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – since SP was lifted on November 2. SMP0328. (talk) 02:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:43, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP edit warring and vandalism. Vacationnine 01:59, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:46, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: This weekend marks the final round of the 2012 season, which will decide the outcome of the 2012 championship. Based on previous years, this will trigger a series of edits to the 2013 season page, mostly to the team and driver table, rearranging content based on championship finishing position. There have already been two edits in the past six hours that foreshadow what will happen. As per long-standing consensus obtained at the Formula 1 WikiProject, we do not update this table with car numbers or championship finishing positions until the publication of the final 2013 entry list, which won't come until mid-January. Therefore, I'm requesting temporary semi-protection for one week to stabilise the page in light of the upcoming championship=deciding round. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 23:06, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1/52 of a year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nyttend (talk) 00:16, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. 99.0.80.70 (talk) 21:24, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 23:47, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism after I'm a Celebrity. Dontforgetthisone (talk) 21:34, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nyttend (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. SMS Talk 21:05, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I recommend restoring my version [33] before AnkhMorpork largely synth edits and then temporarily locking from all editing. Plot Spoiler (talk) 21:29, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
I would also recommend blocks for User:EditorInChiefSD based on his persistent and extreme POV vandalism as well as User:AndyTheGrump for his inappropriate blanking of the page. He is well aware that WP:ARBPIA doesn't permit such extreme action. Plot Spoiler (talk) 21:32, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Update: User:EditorInChiefSD has been blocked - removing much of the source of the edit-warring - but I would still temporarily fully lock content based on AndyTheGrump's blanking (2x). Plot Spoiler (talk) 21:43, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Done by Bbb23, not by me. Nyttend (talk) 22:32, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. IP users are constantly deleting the paragraph about controversies which is neutral and reliably sourced. Edit war. Ratipok (talk) 18:04, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 18:59, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. IP users are constantly deleting the paragraph about 2012 Maribor protests which is neutral and reliably sourced. Edit war. Ratipok (talk) 17:59, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 19:01, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Excessive vandalism. Short term semi-protection, a few days, means the children will get bored and go back to ritual masturbation and crochet. . Bob Re-born (talk) 21:04, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nyttend (talk) 22:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection Vandalism An upset IP being unable to edit a page for which I requested a semi-protection is now vandalizing my user page.--Harout72 (talk) 19:55, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected Indefinite semiprotection, since you're entitled to it in your own userspace. If you want something with a defined end, or if at a later date you want it to be unprotected, leave a note at my talk page. Nyttend (talk) 22:30, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection. Edit war AshLey Msg 13:39, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked.. Nahk7 (talk · contribs) has been indefinitely blocked, so protection doesn't seem to be necessary. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

25 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Latest revision history shows high levels of BLP vandalism and general disruption. -- Luke (Talk) 18:54, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 06:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Done Salted for 1 year. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 15:57, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpupperty. Considering that both users come from Texas, the last IP may be another sock. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:58, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined, AFD closed as redirect, I'll protect if recreated. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 15:53, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by IPs. --MelanieN (talk) 05:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 15:54, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: The dispute appears to have settled down, especially since one of the parties in it has been blocked for socking. Jasper Deng (talk) 03:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

No policy reason for protection, please see discussion and historical evidence at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2012/CandidatesNE Ent 20:38, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Not unprotected. I'm not seeing a consensus to unprotect from the discussion you linked to. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 08:50, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Kolega2357 (talk) 19:44, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. I'm seeing mostly good-faith atempts to improve the article, by IP users whose talk pages are still red links. If you have problems with the edits they are making, please talk to the people first. Page protection should not be used as a substitute for talking and discussion. Vandals, if vandals they be, should be getting warnings. Dianna (talk) 03:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Page has a high risk of vandalism by IP users. Interlude 65 (Push to talk) 19:29, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Might have a high risk but it certainly doesn't show it given how sparse the vandalistic edits are, no point in protecting it pre-emptively. tutterMouse (talk) 21:50, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Dianna (talk) 03:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 15:41, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. Please try to discuss with the users why their edits are inappropriate. Don't assume that IP users know how to read your edit summaries. Page protection should not be used as a substitute for talking to people. Dianna (talk) 03:17, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs making unconstructive edits as pageant results were announced. GrayFullbuster (talk) 14:18, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined. The vast majority of the edits look constructive to me. Not vandalism Dianna (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101talk 06:14, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 06:22, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Shadow (talk) 03:13, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Dianna (talk) 04:05, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP and non-autoconf vandalism and edit warring. Vacationnine 23:53, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I'm just not seeing it. Cluebot is picking up a few things, but the rest looks like good-faith editing to me. Dianna (talk) 04:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Here: [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] Not to mention violation of WP:FILMPLOT by many IP editors Vacationnine 04:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for three weeks. Dianna (talk) 04:14, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you! Vacationnine 04:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Lots of IP Vandalism. §h₳un 9∞76 23:33, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Please re-report if the problem resumes when the protection wears off. Dianna (talk) 03:57, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – During recent 2 days users, most of them which is sockpuppets changing manager name to some random person, I ask temporary protection for 2 weeks. NovaSkola (talk) 22:46, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Dianna (talk) 03:55, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:24, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for three months. Dianna (talk) 03:51, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Mass amount of reverts/edit-warring over rumored and likely match that has yet to be confirmed officially. Unsure of how long for maintained duration as WWE has a pay-per-view between now and the event and the resulting match should be highly promoted starting next year. Papacha (talk) 21:59, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected. I went with one month to start, but I have a feeling this might prove inadequate. Please re-apply if the probelm resumes when the protection wears off. Dianna (talk) 03:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:47, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Dianna (talk) 03:40, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection Persitent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:29, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for one year. Dianna (talk) 03:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – ongoing ip vandalism. Valenciano (talk) 19:57, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Dianna (talk) 03:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Harout72 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection Vandalism An IP, whose address changes every time he/she logs in, keeps posting idiocy on my talk page. I asked for semi-protection yesterday, but it was declined. This is not going to stop as the same IP has vandalized my User-page many times in the past (which is currently protected) and now it's my talk-page.--Harout72 (talk) 18:19, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for one week. Please re-report if the problem resumes when the protection wears off. Dianna (talk) 03:23, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term BLP vandalism. -- Luke (Talk) 15:12, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Dianna (talk) 03:13, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Request protection until December 17th after the PPV ends. Continual vandalism, introduction of deliberate factual errors, original research, and other nonsense. . – Richard BB 14:31, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected until after the event. Wow, that's one busy little article. Dianna (talk) 03:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: A slow edit war going on between some IPs and new editors for the last two weeks. SMS Talk 07:36, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks to start. Please re-report if the problem continues when the protection expires. Dianna (talk) 02:58, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – dynamic ips keep adding unscoured info for Resuce Rangers DuckTales TailSpin amog others. Digifan23 (talk) 07:17, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Dianna (talk) 02:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: A lot of IP vandalism since last month. — Oz (talk) 06:59, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for two weeks. Dianna (talk) 02:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP disruptive editing. Been going on a long time and thus should be indefinite IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:04, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely.Dianna (talk) 02:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:47, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 22:00, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – More Sprouse-related IP vandalism from tumblr.  TheArguer  SAY HI! 21:32, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:25, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

We've been working well in the talk page but it is getting old waiting for all of our edits to be approved. Whatever conflict existed is gone. Can we get this unprotected? Hopkinsenior (talk) 12:27, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined, You are also a sock Courcelles 19:46, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

26 November 2012

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Atleast three different users have recreated this article, it has also been created once with an incorrect spelling. All times it has been deleted under CSD:A7. -- Patchy1 09:09, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Decent stub article has been written. Lectonar (talk) 14:48, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Over the past month, a variety of IPs have been coming along and making a variety of different edits to the list of states at the top of the page. The various changes centre mostly around the disputed states. Some IPs have shifted them under the claimant states, some have shifted them under the supporter states, some have removed them and some have changed their flags. Very few IPs have stuck around the talkpage, and as with all such intractable ethnic and national disputes, this isn't a problem that is going away soon. CMD (talk) 15:51, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Or get a third opinion Lectonar (talk) 14:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent sock IP disruption. — ZjarriRrethues — talk 12:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:35, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: It appears that he was booted off of a UK reality show. The page is getting all sorts of unsourced POV versions of why this happened. I think that a couple days protection will let things die down. I know that the whole situation is a bit cheesy so I will certainly understand of this is declined. In any event thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 00:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Cheesiness is not a criteria for assessing protection requests ;) GedUK  12:48, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Continual removal of infobox image - protection was previously requested on 22/10/12[41] and rejected as Not enough activity. It's still ongoing. At the time I requested the IP engage on the talk page - nothing since. Chaheel Riens (talk)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It is pretty low level and infrequent, so short semi protection might not be very effective, but we porbably need to give it a try this time. It can be lengthened if it continues after. GedUK  12:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. STATic message me! 15:20, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:42, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Torreslfchero (talk) 15:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - IPs repeatedly adding unsourced content. Johannes003 (talk) 12:05, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated disruptive editing by User:Jokrot65 and his/her various sockpuppet IP accounts. Semi-protection for a couple of weeks (ideally) will ensure the article remains stable until this idiot gets bored. . Biker Biker (talk) 07:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Back again with another sock IP. (diff). --Biker Biker (talk) 19:28, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection. Persistent sales inflation. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:20, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant IPs adding unsourced content. STATic message me! 05:17, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Perhaps reprotection necessary before album comes out. Lectonar (talk) 10:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term vandalism. -- Luke (Talk) 02:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Courcelles 04:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Pending-edits protection: Looking at edits in the month of November 2012, the majority (barring two constructive IP edits: first — second — apparent test edit) of edits by unregistered users have been reverted as vandalism during this period of time, which also constitutes the majority of edits to the page. Also appears to apply to October 2012, but I have not looked carefully at that. I can understand why 'friction' would attract adolescent editors as a vandalism target. (I am an admin but wanted to request this protection rather than impose it.) --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 15:45, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

P.S. There are 146 watchers and 32 editors with >10 edits, meaning that pending edits would not have to wait long for approval, just as vandalism is currently being reverted quickly. Editors include 2 bots and 8 anonymous editors. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:58, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Usual, not pending (which is currently not a community-accepted protection mode). Materialscientist (talk) 23:51, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: High level of vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 14:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined, for the same reason as yesterday. Dianna (talk) 19:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

27 November 2012

Full protection: High level of vandalism/edit warring over sexual abuse allegations. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected — Semiprotecting for now. Please start a discussion on the talk page about the problems that you see. It is strange to see an article which could be so troublesome have nothing at all on the talk page. I'm not aware of any specific registered editors that might be causing a problem. If they are, blocks might be considered. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 20:09, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: IP editors make vandal edits with no sources. I reported about vandalism and it will be better to make a Semi-protection to avoid any Vandal edits in future.--ChelseaFCG (talk) 07:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC). ChelseaFCG (talk) 07:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks like a content dispute to me. I'd decline but I am in dispute with ChelseaFCG over sourcing and pov issues (which I think are part of the problem with this article, some Georgian-Armenian thing). 14:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs)
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Lectonar (talk) 14:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. §h₳un 9∞76 00:50, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. 3 edits from one IP is not enough. And better to block the IP than protect the page. GedUK  13:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Controversial subject where several anons regularly insert unsourced info. Rafy talk 13:04, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. And I see you've left a welcome message on User 81..'s talk-page, but otherwise made no attempt at communication, not even on the article's talkpage. So try to talk to each other :). Lectonar (talk) 13:09, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. StringTheory11 (t • c) 00:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined Vandalism is very clumpy on that page. Short protection probably wouldn't be much use as it might only cover days when nothing happens anyway. GedUK  13:13, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. §h₳un 9∞76 23:46, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  13:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism over at least the last month. --No qwach macken (talk) 21:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Low frequency. GedUK  13:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Some unregistered users keep on erasing some of the information/data in the article. There is current dispute between China and Philippines, which is a source of frequent cyberspace feuding between Chinese and Filipinos, and even Wikipedia is not immune from this. --Matthewprc (talk) 14:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It's not too bad at the moment as far as I can tell from edit summaries. Relist if necessary. GedUK  12:41, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – consistent edition by IP's Shrikanthv (talk) 11:42, 26 November 2012 (UTC). Shrikanthv (talk) 11:42, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Since the past several months , repeated cases of vandalism & unwarranted edits from unknown persons with vested interests. Even sourced and verifiable content being deleted to belittle her. --ANKMALI (talk) 09:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The most recent dispute is being discussed on the talk page. The other 'vandalism' is too long ago to take into account at this stage. GedUK  12:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

The article is protected yet false information is listed and i can't correct it and the the protecter is yet to change these yet i have left requests for them to be corrected--Onlythetruthisappropriate (talk) 16:59, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

You did leave requests but you didn't leave {{editsemiprotected}} either, if you do then someone (and not necessarily Kww) should be able to add them if the content you want to add is verifiable though it's upto you to leave references for them to check against. tutterMouse (talk) 22:35, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Not unprotected See above Lectonar (talk) 12:29, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – IP Address 74.73.71.13 had made several defamatory edits to this article based on legal action that appears to be ongoing. The IP made assertions on my talk page that they would re-add the content when the relevant court documents were online. The IP clearly has a COI issue here and in my opinion, is directly involved in the legal proceedings. The IP took this issue to DR/N but the discussion was closed as the request was malformed. I reported the IP at AIV but no action was taken - even though this is a BLP issue. I request temporary semi-protection in order to keep this article BLP compliant. Alex J Fox(Talk)(Contribs) 14:26, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:29, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant IP vandalism; almost no helpful IP edits. — Michaelmas1957 (talk) 07:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection López's age is a recurring joke on Facebook and Twitter (in Mexico), I suggest that like a few weeks may be enough to begin with. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 07:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection requested for a month. Vandalism has restarted since the page got automatically unprotected after the previous semi protection of a fortnight. Wifione Message 06:04, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:38, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs continually spamming a fansite.  Mbinebri  talk ← 21:15, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:58, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full-protection: Edit warring during RFC concerning relevance of father's connection to John Birch Society. Please protect until consensus is reached. If possible please restore to this state at start of RFC, 22:55, 15 November 2012. Jojalozzo 05:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. That's just about until the end of the RfC. I did rollback the article; a detailed explanation is on the article's talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Webclient101talk 04:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and personal attacks. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. You might be better served creating a separate page for IP/unconfirmed users then yuor main talk page can have a longer protection. GedUK  12:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 20:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Looks like a class has got hold of it. GedUK  12:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: An editor continues to IP hop to add ethnicity to the lead despite WP:MOSBIO conventions and against talk page consensus. They have essentially been the only IP in weeks to edit the article, always to blindly restore the inappropriate ethnicity to the lead. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 20:19, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected. I did that below. GedUK  12:39, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – similar to the {{HTTP}} template this is a target of geek (and stupid) vandalism. Please give us some weeks of protection. mabdul 18:57, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: From September 4 onward, all the edits to this article (except for one I just made) have been vandalism by IPs or redlink accounts. Despite the diligence of multiple page-watchers, at least one edit went undetected for several days because it was overlooked in a vandalistic series. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Looks like a good candidate for pending changes to me. GedUK  12:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: - persistent edit warring - an editor is trying to insert a controversial paragraph. There is no consensus about it, Jingiby and Fakirbakit constested its necessity in the article. Stable version is 03:28, 23 November 2012‎ 79.117.147.147 (talk) 11:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:38, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please check the article history of addition, there has been constant edition by IP's as the news is red hot for now Shrikanthv (talk) 11:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC). Shrikanthv (talk) 11:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Poorly sourced nationality being added to article. IP hopping editor not taking part in talkpage discussion. Murry1975 (talk) 08:22, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 11:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - article has a long history of protection so it might be time for a long term semi. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:18, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 11:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:03, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:21, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Widespread IP vandalism after protection expired a few hours ago, might be time for long term semi -A1candidate (talk) 10:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 10:59, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – long term vandalism, might be time for long term protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 10:28, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple vandal-edits today from closely-related school-IPs, all from same district. Shearonink (talk) 22:12, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 20:58, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 10:29, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Musdan77 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent disruptive vandalism. Musdan77 (talk) 03:23, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive policy violations. Musdan77 (talk) 03:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined - Editing dispute. In general it is not good practice to request protection of an article where you are currently involved in a dispute. (It's not simple vandalism, in any case.) King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – You know, this article seems to have been monkeyed around with so much I'm not even sure what the last good version is. I think Nov. 5th. Anyway, I think semi-protection might could down on the hijinks. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent persistent vandalism by multiple new editors, both IP,[42][43] and registered.[44][45] Page was recently protected but vandalism returned almost as soon as protection ended. AussieLegend (✉) 15:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Penwhale | dance in the air and follow his steps 06:30, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Ibadibam (talk) 01:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – User of the same name keeps creating this article with information already on Adam Campbell (footballer born 1995), and just replacing the name with his own in the infobox and start. But the rest still says his name, it's clear vandalism. I've nominated the article for speedy deletion, yet again, and am requesting page protection so this page of vandalism cannot be created again. TBrandley 20:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – We have an IP editor constantly making nonconstructive edits. ...William 21:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Bizarre sockpuppetry vandalism by two SPAs who think that legitimate referencing, one of the pillars of wikipedia, is actually copyright violation. Temporary protection would at least prevent the newer of the two accounts from disrupting the article. . Biker Biker (talk) 18:53, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Sgates05, one of the alleged sockpuppet accounts, vandalised the page again (deleting properly sourced content and replacing it with a huge mostly-spam list of links, then wrote on my talk page "we are a big company and many colleagues in my department say your "Mobile Device Management" edit in wiki distorts competition", which is a clear admission that he has a serious conflict of interest as well as professional jealousy and seeks to undermine Wikipedia with his commercial interest. Turning off access to new accounts on this article would stop this abuse. --Biker Biker (talk) 21:24, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – BLP violations. Torreslfchero (talk) 18:30, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Edit warring with IPs over certain additions to article. Shadow (talk) 03:18, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thefaithmonster1 is autoconfirmed, so full is necessary. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:37, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term vandalism and BLP issues. -- Luke (Talk) 03:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:41, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 20:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Keith D. --Webclient101talk 23:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

28 November 2012

Talk:Katherine Schwarzenegger (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Someone is using this page to post personal messages in German to the article subject. Going on since at least March using different IPs. Looks like a stalker using Wiki in an attempt to communicate. . Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I think it would also be a good idea to revision delete this guy's messages from the edit history as well. Can't understand what is being said and some of it may be derogatory or defamatory as well as stalking. Either way should not give this person a means of communication. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
(Non-administrator comment)Just from using Google Translate, this stuff...yeah, very stalker-ish. Shearonink (talk) 18:31, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
I initially semi-protected it for 3 days in response to the AIV report, I have no objection if another admin would like to increase the length of the protection. Monty845 18:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: IP vandalism.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:53, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment): Not enough vandalism to warrant protection. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 17:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Almost all IP contributions are vandalism. Protection log already has quite a few entries in it. Vandalism resumes after protection expires. ‑Scottywong| confess _ 21:50, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive edits through an IP hopper blocked for a year as a result of long-term vandalism. Freshh (talk) 14:55, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined We have 2, maybe 3 instances of vandalism in November. That is not enough. IF the problems persist, please relist. Lectonar (talk) 15:37, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Very important page that is bound to be having high footfall for editors and readers in the next few days and possible weeks. Half the edits we get are reverted or are reverts. It will be a lot more prudent if new users and IPs are to make edit requests rather than add the information they deem important directly to the article. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Wikipedia can be edited by anyone and no one is better than others, also pages are not protected pre-emptively and there has been only a little unconstructive editing. Also it doesn't have a history of protection which would justify indef. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:22, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
I agree. Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Also: no preemptive protection. Lectonar (talk) 13:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. SMS Talk 13:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined It's gone quiet at present, and I've asked both editors to stope edit warring and engage in dispute resolution - hopefully they'll do so. Please re-report if the edit war continues. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 13:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined You should follow Diannas advice from the day before yesterday and at least try to talk to the ip-editors. Lectonar (talk) 13:31, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: this article is under national pressure and non neutral view. IP addresses are reverting sourced edits. I reported about Vandalism. Protect this page because they providing disinformation and Propaganda. 216.169.108.193 (talk) 08:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. This appears to be a content dispute. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:18, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Permanent semi-protection: This is a typical troll bait. Also, check out the latest IP war. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 02:41, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) It seems to have stopped, and I've reverted the article back to a version before the IPs. Hopefully they don't come back. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:20, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Lectonar (talk) 13:21, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Loads of IP vandals . §h₳un 9∞76 00:57, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I can only see one genuine IP vandal (68.238.75.185) in recent days, and they seem to have given up after receiving a final warning. If they reappear, AIV would be a more appropriate venue. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Not abusive or mindless vandalism, just unnconstructive and unsourced edits. -- Patchy1 23:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 12:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 22:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 12:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent ip vandalism from ip range belonging to Davis School District, Utah. Keristrasza (talk) 17:17, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 12:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism/editing test by IP users. — иz нίpнόp  15:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:57, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: yesturday morning i think it was i requested this page to be unprotected because i had left messages requesting edits be made i took your advice and added an edit request box and it is yet to be responded to and the edit has not be corrected i am now requesting unprotection so i can carry out edits and possibly protect the page myself so i can edit the page thanks --Onlythetruthisappropriate (talk) 22:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes i know but the protecter has not edited the page to show correct information --Onlythetruthisappropriate (talk) 23:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Not unprotected You have to be patient, we are all volunteers here. And: you still did not provide reliable sources for the edit you want to be made. Lectonar (talk) 09:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I did not need sources the day has passed and it is listed as 'on the 25th of november she will perform 'sight of you on the x factor' she never performed!--Onlythetruthisappropriate (talk) 19:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Create a new page (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite semi-protection: This is a redirect to a Project page. Should be semi-protected to prevent new users from creating new article in this page itself. This has happened twice. Have a look at its history. Anbu121 (talk me) 12:13, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I've transcluded Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Your first article as an editnotice to the page - regardless of whether protection is applied this should be helpful. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected Yunshui 雲‍水 13:25, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Been heavily vandalized since it was unprotected on July 21, 2012. XapApp (talk) 08:11, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. Let's wait some more years. Lectonar (talk) 13:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs vandalize constantly. Please semi-protect for a few months. — Michaelmas1957 (talk) 07:25, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:21, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continued content dispute. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 04:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Discussion has started on the talkpage; hopefully it can be hashed out there. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism due to a recent event. Maybe a week just until things die down? Paulthomas2 (talk) 10:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 13:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Bitcoin (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

In the past month Talk:Bitcoin has been semi-protected 3 times to deal with vandalism from indefinitely blocked user HowardStrong (talk · contribs), who was using proxies and multiple local IP addresses to vandalize the page. The semi-protection expired on 22 November, but it looks like the activity is continuing now, with the IP address removing several discussed URLs and refactoring the edits of other editors. The IP address currently disrupting the talk page appears to be a proxy, which fits the MO of other sockpuppets of HowardStrong. - SudoGhost 08:51, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Dude, those were typos. I don't live on Wikipedia. Don't report me for not knowing how things work. I thought I was editing an addition that was going into the article. I am sorry. 199.167.195.218 (talk) 09:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
You accidently typo'd out a few dozen websites, accidently struck and removed other editors' comments, not once but four times...on a proxy? - SudoGhost 09:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I tried to strike out the false claim of "Bitcoin describes itself" but that failed obviously. Anyways, I'm on some old adware-filled computer in the backroom of my boss's shitty office. It tends to do shit like that all the time. Sorry. 199.167.195.218 (talk) 09:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 13:34, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-protection: Persistent Sockpuppetry. Similar action requested for:

Both Semi-protected for a period of two months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:04, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There is repeated vandalism, such that I am having a hard time getting it all. The vandalism has been going on for a while now. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 04:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ⁓ Hello71 03:33, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 13:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: at the least. Persistent longterm vandalism. 99.153.143.169 (talk) 00:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 13:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Suddenly there is a lot of childish vandalism. Could the article have protection for several days?. Student7 (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 13:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: IPs speculating on makeup of tournament without reliable source verification. Hack (talk) 12:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – BLP violations. Torreslfchero (talk) 11:35, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:58, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - High level of edits by unregistered IPs keeps changing the gross of a particluar film these past few days. Alphonsewan (talk) 06:18, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is kind of odd, but both an IP and a registered user (my personal opinion is that they're the same person, but that's moderately irrelevant here) have been blanking this AfD discussion, in case it's a dynamic IP or the user creates a new account once blocked, locking this page for a few hours might not be a bad idea...I believe thus far it's been blanked thrice. Thanks. Go Phightins! 03:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected — One month. If you notice the registered James V. Foth (talk · contribs) blanking the AfD again, consider reporting at WP:AIV. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 03:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 22:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:38, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Article has been semi-protected numerous times for vandalism. Vandalism has returned after one year block was lifted on November 24. If possible, request indefinite semi-protect. Msw1002 (talk) 18:30, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Repeated rv by sockmaster [[49]], some 10 in a few months. Recent rvs by suspected IPs. (I have reported the IPs for SPI, [50] and [51]). Sockmaster this time useds volatile IPs, so blocking is not to be expected or solving. -DePiep (talk) 17:37, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:33, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: The edit warring was four months ago now. This page should be unprotected so it can be improved, or deleted as a wholly unsourced BLP. -- Patchy1 02:13, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected I downgraded to semiprotection, as I do not feel comfortable with fully lifting protection yet; and I have watchlisted the article. Lectonar (talk) 12:32, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 01:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Rjd0060. --Webclient101talk 02:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Bearing a title suggestive to adolescents, this article is a persistent target of high level IP vandalism. Suggest a long term protection. Alcmaeonid (talk) 23:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 22:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Socks of Mujhideen101 back after last protection expired. SMS Talk 13:11, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Similar action requested at following articles:

--SMS Talk 13:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected by administrator Reaper Eternal. (Indefinite) --Webclient101talk 02:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 22:13, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 22:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 22:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Lots of vandalism today. Shearonink (talk) 20:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. -- Patchy1 09:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

29 November 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs not following guidelines for the page. Putting things that are completely false in it.(Like a 2013 air crash when it is still 2012). ...William 17:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Already protected. by another admin. Courcelles 17:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. – Richard BB 16:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 17:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Steady stream of IP vandal edits. — Michaelmas1957 (talk) 13:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected. The page has never been protected before, so two weeks to start. Dianna (talk) 15:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Corporate IP keeps reverting anyone who edits this page. Article has some issues (mainly advert-y content and minor copyvio issues) but attempts to change content or add tags are reverted by the same IP. This has been going on more or less since July. First from named accounts trying to remove negative content from the article. Now this IP is basically reverting any changes made. Suggest blocking the IP or protecting the page so I can at least clean it up and remove the copy/pasted content. Pinkadelica♣ 23:41, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. IP's been blocked. GedUK  12:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article is still sensitive to drive by edits by IP editors. The most current are switches between India/Pakistan, and hero/villain, as partisan factions own or disown Kasab. To put this article in to context the gentleman was executed a week ago. The article has just come free from a week's semi-protection, a duration which appeared reasonable, to allow the media frenzy to die down. It appears that feelings will still run high for a further week or two, and a short extension to the post execution semi-protection is justified. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

  • There were two requests. I requested protection. Another user mistook the protection when it was applied as being indefinite, and requested unprotection. The unprotection request was resolved procedurally as being mistaken. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent section blanking by IPs. Please protect for atleast a week. Anbu121 (talk me) 05:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection. This one is a bit hard to explain, but I'll be as succinct as I can: right now, there has been a wave of media reports claiming that the results of the final race of the season could be called into question on a technicality. Owing to certain circumstances, this has the potential to change the final championship standings and a new champion declared. There has been no official word, but discussions across the internet have demonstrated that this is a very controversial issue already, with the potential for multiple interpretations of the events. I have since made an edit to the page (and made it invisible) so that there is content there in the event something does come of it (and which can be removed quickly and quietly if nothing does), but in the meantime, I would like to request temporary semi-protection to avoid unsubstantiated, unreferenced and flagrantly biased edits such as this one from being made. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 07:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP users constantly removing production info. . MisterShiney ✉ 06:43, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – A user using socks has been edit warring across pages.The sock issue is being discussedhere. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined I've blocked two self-admitted socks and hope this will quench the war. Repost if I'm wrong. Materialscientist (talk) 05:27, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Significant amount of IP vandalism and content dispute/edit warring leading up to the vote for the Heisman Trophy on 08 December 2012. It seems the page may have been mistakenly fully protected instead of semi-protected by Yunshui on 28 Novermber 2012 to stop the edit warring. It seems semi-protection should have been applied based on the following guideline for semi-protection -- Subject to significant but temporary vandalism or disruption (for example, due to media attention) when blocking individual users is not a feasible option. Manziel is receiving tremendous media attention at the moment because he is the leading Heisman candidate in the polls as a freshman, and voters will be casting their ballots this week and next. Consequently, his article has experienced a spike in disruptive editing (vandalism and section deleting) from anonymous users. I request full protection be removed and semi-protection applied until after the Heisman trophy awards on 08 December 2012, at which point the page would revert to unprotected. --BroJohnE (talk) 05:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Every other edit for the past 2 months is a registered user reverting an IP vandal. . ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:43, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect until it will be deleted by AFD. Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 18:38, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Page blankings by IP addresses. As is, the page is very well-sourced. The alterations leave a cheerful company description lifted directly from their website and there have been no attempts to reach out and address anything specific on the Derwick Associates Talk page or any user Talk pages. Justiciero1811 (talk) 18:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A shifting IP is edit-warring over the WP:ENGVAR of this article, against clear consensus. McGeddon (talk) 17:42, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite Semi-protection: Endless high level of IP vandalism, especially this time of year, but continues throughout the year. Checking the protection logs, I see that the last two times Mayflower Compact was protected for a year each time, and expired just in time for the lead-up to Thanksgiving. Haven't seen any IP edits that have not been disruptive. Mayflower's last protection expired a year ago, and the past year has seen more disruptive edits than meaningful ones by a large margin. I don't see a good reason for semi-protection to ever expire for these two pages. Grollτech (talk) 03:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 07:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected indefinitely. Courcelles 07:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism (including libel) according current political disputes. Article concerns a living statesman of the United States.--Artimaean (talk) 02:40, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. No recent protection, but this current fiscal cliff stuff is making it a target, so this should get back to him being not much of a target. Courcelles 07:16, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: This article gets hit pretty regularly but there has been an increase in nonsense vandalism this week. I am guessing that it is being taught in few classes but that it just a guess. If we could get a couple weeks worth that would give us some peace but anything would be a help. MarnetteD | Talk 18:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 7 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 07:18, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Significant amount of IP vandalism all of a sudden for an article that is generally rather quiet. Probably a week or so will cool it down. Montanabw(talk) 18:43, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 07:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection - IP-hopping editor reverting several editors against consensus. - SudoGhost 05:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 05:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101talk 01:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 5 years, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 01:59, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit-warring over the details of the lead over the past few days. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 16:51, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) There isn't enough vandalism's to warrant protection. What I can see is the variations in POV, so please consider discussing things and adding to content. What I could see here is no IP edits from at-least past one month. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 17:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| chatter _ 22:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Scotty. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 22:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

30 November 2012

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 20:37, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 19:07, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:38, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editors don't listen. There is a pending contract reported by anonymous sources. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Trystan (talk) 19:11, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:27, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by IP hopping editor. Deli nk (talk) 17:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Let's see what a week of semiprotection will do. Nyttend (talk) 18:34, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Semi-protected for one week by Nyttend. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:34, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I can't find the talk page for Atheism, so I'll put it here. I'm pretty sure the figure for atheism in the UK is now around 51% (according to the figures on the Religion in the UK page) but on the Atheism page it still says only about 17%. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlielow (talk • contribs) 21:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Roughly 6 months ago a temporary semi-protection was granted to prevent IP vandalism. Sadly nothing has changed since: IP editors still add unreferenced claims about the party’s political position all the time. Requesting indefinite semi-protection as the main article North Korea already has. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 10:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. E4024 (talk) 00:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection. The History and Companies sections are spam-magnets, almost any IP edit is guaranteed to come from a novelty company trying to promote their product. Protection would benefit the article at least until it's made C-class and its structure is better than the current list of verifiable gamification companies. Diego (talk) 23:31, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:UFC 155: Dos Santos vs. Velasquez II (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary full protection: Reqeusting full WP:SALT on this talk page that keeps getting re-created after various IP editors/users refuse to acknoledge consensus and are going to jump up and down on the soapbox because their article was deleted. Per [52] it's clear that the message is not taking root. Requesting full salt untill at minimum the 30th of december (when the event this talk page is associated with) has taken place. Hasteur (talk) 17:32, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation protected. Salvio Let's talk about it! 17:37, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protect -- repeated addition of "critical acclaim" from IP editors. While the game was well received aggregate websites show multiple scores at 70% or below. Sticking with "positive" in Reception section per WP:VG standards and usage of Metacritic wording. Asking for three week cooldown period as the game is extremely high profile at the moment. --Teancum (talk) 13:28, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring - Persistent modification of table to show false figures for State of Gujarat that do not match those given in cited sources (cited sources say 89% (2007) and 90% (2011); editors repeatedly changing one or both to 100%).Shankargopal (talk) 10:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Recently died. Inappropriate edits expected and editing warring expected. Surge_Elec (talk) 10:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:04, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Persistent addition of unsourced content. Snoozlepet (talk) 05:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Some speculations with no reliable sources by multiple IPs. -- Luke (Talk) 02:16, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. BLP article. Dan56 (talk) 23:55, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Permanent semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. – Almost everyday consistent IP vandalism and unsourced edits for the "Confirmed Characters" who have not been confirmed by Koei yet. Every single time the protection is lifted, IP accounts are excessively repeating this action, after the note above stating TO NOT ADD UNCONFIRMED CHARACTERS EVEN IF THEY WERE PLAYABLE IN PREVIOUS INSTALLMENTS AND ARE YET TO BE CONFIRMED BY KOEI THEMSELVES.--Eric - Contact me please. I prefer conversations started on my talk page if the subject is changed 20:18, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated change of stats across many airport articles in the country by IPs 61.x and 121.x which I believe are the same. Hence requesting that this page be semi'd. . — Abhishek  Talk 12:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of two months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Deliberate and persistent hoaxing from anons and other users, insisting that certain characters from the series died despite the fact that it NEVER happened in the storylines. Blake Gripling (talk) 10:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-Protection:- Frequent genre warring, vandalism and unsourced genre changes. Nu metal is constantly added when on the Mudvayne edit page. I frequently tell this to the editors but they ignore. 174.252.105.3 (talk) 23:22, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:53, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent vandalism by different IP users. Astros4477 (talk) 23:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Considering the protection history, I think 6 months is valid GedUK  12:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – I have been fighting the inclusion of some content that simply does not belong, but keeps being inserted. As you can see, this page was in pretty bad shape for a while. Please protect it. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 20:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I don't think full protection is necessary. GedUK  12:44, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 20:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:41, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Vandalism related to the Savile scandal now starting - likely to increase as Twitter rumours develop in relation to latest police questioning. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I completely agree, this should be considered as a matter of urgency. Parrot of Doom 11:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Already protected by administrator StephenBuxton. GedUK  12:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - Using the article as a forum for furthering personal disputes. Whipartist (talk) 19:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection: Please unprotect this redirect so it can instead be redirected to Nathan Sykes (I protected the redirect myself while a sysop). Mkativerata (talk) 07:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Done Redirected as indicated. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 08:04, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

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

Unprotection: This talk page should not be protected to begin with; the owner is using this to prevent editors from commenting regarding his conduct, both it and his 'alternate talk page' show numerous instances of misconduct and behavioral issues being raised (and subsequently deleted by him) to prevent it being a wall of misconduct reports and warnings. This is not how these issues should be managed. At present he is involved in another misconduct issue, but cannot be reached by editors due to protection of his talk page and his deletion of anything on the 'alternative talk page' he has created citing his disclaimer of "If you came here to rant, curse, or make nonsensical comments, don't bother, as your message will be deleted." BaSH PR0MPT (talk) 06:22, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined, Please discuss this with the protecting admin Dweller (talk · contribs). The page is only semiprotected, there is a history of vandalism and an unprotected alternative page. This meets the letter of the policy. Please note that an editor can remove comments from their own talk page, this means that they are considered to have read them.Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 07:59, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Creation protection: User:Kcron24 has re-created his personal political manifesto twice since it was deleted at AfD per WP:SNOW. (The first time it was deleted under G2, this time I've tagged it for G4.) Rather than wait for him to do this enough times that he gets himself blocked, why don't we remove his ability to do it at all? - sometimes problem editors take it as a sign to "shape up or ship out." — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 02:32, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Fully protected — Article salted one month to prevent further recreation. Warned the editor. EdJohnston (talk) 03:17, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Permanent semi-protection: Persistent IP blanking of large well-referenced sections. Attleboro (talk) 20:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected — Two years. Very long-term disruption. EdJohnston (talk) 03:21, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Himesh84 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary full protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked – The user has been blocked for socking for a week and is attacking 2 admins. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Declined — This is nothing that the admins can't handle. If he wants to dig a deeper hole, that's his privilege. His further disclosures may help to decide what to do when the one-week block runs out. EdJohnston (talk) 01:37, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Persistent IP sockpuppetry. Tgeairn (talk) 01:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. – As in the Spanish version of the article, this entry has been vandalized repeatedly, once the previous semi-protections have ended. It is always the same modus operandi of the anonymous vandal, because that person always changes the real and proved year of birth of the artist, 1972 (and other data related to her age), for the wrong year of 1970. Rafa XIII (talk) 18:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected — Six months. It is not of tremendous importance whether 1970 or 1972 is shown as her birth date. But the continued IP edit warring is disruptive. It appears that the warring has been going on since early 2012. EdJohnston (talk) 01:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Temporary full-protection: avoid WP:EDIT WAR. User:Ahnoneemoos made significant changes to the article per WP:BEBOLD and WP:AGF but User:Mercy11 is reverting the whole article to a previous state rather than discussing his reverts because he deems the changes as "diminishing" and "bad"—a highly subjective assessment and a POV. WP:EDIT WAR ensued. Requesting temporary full protection until a discussion develops that warrants full revert. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 15:45, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Interesting, how the user is requesting a protection but only to a state that is convenient to him. I invite the reviewing admin to check out the change log of the article and also its Talk Page to see who initiated the edit war (it should be clear this was Ahnoneemoos) and who started the Talk Page invitation/discussion (it should be clear Mercy11 did). My invistation was immediately followed -- not by discussion -- but by an immediate revert of my edits and by this immediate request for protection by Ahnoneemoos.
So yes, I support that the article be protected, but only to the state that that it was before Ahnoneemoos stated the edit war. Before making significant changes to the article Ahnoneemoos should have dissuced it, but in the absence of initial discussion, he should had discussed it subsequant to my show of controversy. The article was an otherwise stable article, that is it should be reverted to the 01:58, 26 August 2012 version by Thief12 [53] prior to an administrative lock. For behavior like that of Ahnoneemoos here, where he kickoffs an edit war and then portrait yourself as a victim before Admins, should not be rewarded except if the editor has followed Wikipedia established protocols, which he did not. Thanks. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 16:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC), and I approve this message.
Actually if you look at User talk:Mercy11 you will realize that I was the one that began the process of WP:DISPUTERESOLUTION by posting a message on his talk page. Unfortunately, User:Mercy11 reverted my edits once again simply because he beleived them to be "diminishing", "bad", and "negative"—whatever that means since it's just a personal opinion and a subjective matter. Considering that my edits were based on WP:GOODFAITH and per WP:BEBOLD, and considering the fact that User:Mercy11 did not show any desire to discuss this matter, I decided to request this protection, in order to avoid an WP:EDITWAR. I have no problems when people revert back because of mistakes, but when it's based on an opinion, and when they are reverting the whole thing, well that's different. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 17:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. ‑Scottywong| comment _ 17:58, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Archive/2012/11&oldid=1147961288"