Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
GoPuma (talk | contribs)
14 edits
GoPuma (talk | contribs)
14 edits
Line 120: Line 120:


===={{la|Debate on the monarchy in Canada}}====
===={{la|Debate on the monarchy in Canada}}====
{{noredirect|http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puma_Swede}}


Page weas protected because of dispute mainly between two editors. After some discussion at [[Talk:Debate on the monarchy in Canada]] one editor party to the dispute has ceased to participate, not commenting further beyond 05:08, 20 February 2008. It was suggested immediately after that he begin the dispute resolution process to break the stalemate, but he has not done so in the eleven days since. Though this doesn't necessarily mean the dispute has been resolved, it does seem the person representing one side of it has disengaged themselves and thus there's little further threat of disruption to the stability of the article. --[[User:G2bambino|G2bambino]] ([[User talk:G2bambino|talk]]) 14:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Page weas protected because of dispute mainly between two editors. After some discussion at [[Talk:Debate on the monarchy in Canada]] one editor party to the dispute has ceased to participate, not commenting further beyond 05:08, 20 February 2008. It was suggested immediately after that he begin the dispute resolution process to break the stalemate, but he has not done so in the eleven days since. Though this doesn't necessarily mean the dispute has been resolved, it does seem the person representing one side of it has disengaged themselves and thus there's little further threat of disruption to the stability of the article. --[[User:G2bambino|G2bambino]] ([[User talk:G2bambino|talk]]) 14:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:00, 2 March 2008

"WP:RFP" and "WP:RPP" redirect here. You may also be looking for Wikipedia:Requests for permissions, Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission, or Wikipedia:Random page patrol.
    Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.
    Shortcuts

    Before requesting, read the protection policy. Full protection is used to stop edit warring between multiple users or to prevent vandalism to high-risk templates; semi-protection and pending changes are usually used to prevent IP and new user vandalism (see the rough guide to semi-protection); and move protection is used to stop pagemove revert wars. Extended confirmed protection is used where semi-protection has proved insufficient (see the rough guide to extended confirmed protection)

    After a page has been protected, it is listed in the page history and logs with a short rationale, and the article is listed on Special:Protectedpages. In the case of full protection due to edit warring, admins should not revert to specific versions of the page, except to get rid of obvious vandalism.

    Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level
    Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level
    Request a specific edit to a protected page
    Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
    this header: view • edit


    Current requests for protection

    Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

    Full protect User Orderinchaos (Talk | contribs) is removing sourced information regarding 'Jewish-Australian' This information was added by another well respected user (not myself) and I have also checked the source. Her Jewish faith is sourced on a number of pages including 2, 5-6, etc. in the book Milliken, Robert Mother Of Rock (Melbourne, Black Inc. 2002) ISBN 1-86395-139-3. After reading the book her faith played an important role during her career. Until Orderinchaos (Talk | contribs) can provide a source disputing Lillian's strong Jewish faith he should not removed sourced material from a peer reviewed book. Orderinchaos (Talk | contribs) has not responded to the discusison but is unilaterally reverting 'Jewish Australian' from her background. GaryGazza (talk) 14:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection, Medvedev will become the Russian President-elect in the next few hours, and this page is almost certain to be subject to vandalism. --Philip Stevens (talk) 14:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Semi-protection is not used against anticipated vandalism. If actual vandalism occurs feel free to relist. GBT/C 14:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

    indefinite full-protection Requesting to have my userpage and my talk page fully protected. Mike Traceur (talk) 14:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Your userpage has been indefinitely semi-protected. Your user talk page shouldn't be protected unless necessary, as doing so would restrict the ability of IP or newly registered users to communicate with you, and there is no disruption at this time which would justify such a request. GBT/C 14:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined Undone, in retrospect. You're a newly registered user, so I have a sneaking suspicion that semi-protection may leave you unable to edit your own userpage for a few days. GBT/C 14:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism. Making my usual request for SP of this regularly vandalized article since expiration of last SP on Feb. 12. Because of its nature, it's an anon IP vandal magnet: just in last 4 days, there have been 26 vandalism edits/reversions. Article is otherwise very stable. JGHowes talk - 13:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Alexf42 13:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Rudget. 13:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Rudget. 13:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:05, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined -- Alexf42 13:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined -- Alexf42 13:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rudget. 13:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Alexf42 13:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Alexf42 13:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined -- Alexf42 13:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. constant vandalism and spamming by IPs Steve Crossin (talk) 13:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 5 days. — E talk 13:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 12:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 3 weeks. — E talk 13:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism.The Evil Spartan (talk) 12:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 3 weeks. — E talk 13:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. constant vandalism Steve Crossin (talk) 12:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Alexf42 13:37, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection. Edit war underway. Currently a large number of contributions from a limited number of users, most unsigned or recent registrations. Controversial topic. Debate (talk) 11:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Constant vandalism by IP's Steve Crossin (talk) 11:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected - for a short 48 hours since the vandalism picked up today. Two days ought to be enough to get their interest to wear off.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 11:39, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Full - people insist on including unverifiable information. Will (talk) 11:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    permanent creation protection, repeated recreation of hoax page. Redfarmer (talk) 10:37, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected by Faithlessthewonderboy.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 10:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection. A permanent stream of anon editors (from different locations) and throwaway SPA's, edit-warring, probably in a coordinated meatpuppet campaign, against the inclusion of an image and the wording of the accompanying text, about which there has been ample discussion (on Talk:Minorities in Greece) and there is consensus among all established editors. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jmlk17 08:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    permanent semi-protection IP vandalism has been going on for a long time, and previous requests to protect this page have been declined. However recent edits have been made in ways that prevent bots from detecting them and are so subtle that even other users are missing them. Vandalism to this page has been consistent ever since I started editing over a year ago and has been progressively getting worse. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 07:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. A bit unactive for my tastes, but let's see how 5 days works out. Jmlk17 10:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection The IP vandalism keeps coming back. It has been slightly over a week since unprotection and it is still getting heavily vandalized. Footballfan190 (talk) 07:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection Vandalism, article receives much vandalism, and it's often uncaught.The Evil Spartan (talk) 06:31, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 3 weeks. bibliomaniac15 I see no changes 06:37, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite-full-protection: Article constantly being vandalized by anon users. Within minutes after any semi-protection is lifted/expired, it is constantly attacked by these anons. We've had this article semi-pro several times. But it is no longer enough, as the iPhone and iPod touch are controversial products amongst the hacker community. Groink (talk) 06:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for one month. Full protection would be too harsh at this point--let's try a longer semi-protect and see how it goes. Blueboy96 06:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Full protect edit warring. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for 2 days. After two days the page will be automatically unprotected. Blueboy96 05:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for unprotection

    Shortcuts

    Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.

    • To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
    • Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
    • Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
    • If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.

    Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

    Puma Swede

    I don't know why it's even protected in the first place, but the Spanish wiki is up and running and if there wasn't any protection I'd be able to create the article in just a few minutes. GoPuma (talk) 14:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Page weas protected because of dispute mainly between two editors. After some discussion at Talk:Debate on the monarchy in Canada one editor party to the dispute has ceased to participate, not commenting further beyond 05:08, 20 February 2008. It was suggested immediately after that he begin the dispute resolution process to break the stalemate, but he has not done so in the eleven days since. Though this doesn't necessarily mean the dispute has been resolved, it does seem the person representing one side of it has disengaged themselves and thus there's little further threat of disruption to the stability of the article. --G2bambino (talk) 14:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Ho-Oh

    This redirect was protected and is inaccurate because the target of recdirect is a list of fictional (popular culture) Pokemon characters. But the origin of Ho-Oh is in fact the Japanese (official) pronunciation of Chinese Fenghuang as used in numerous Japanese cultures and writtings. I request to unprotect this redirect and reprotect it once the the target is altered to Fenghuang or at least make it a disambiguation page. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 03:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Ho-Oh is the name of a Pokémon, and has a "see also" section pointing to Fenghuang, last I checked. And your pronunciation is incorrect, Fenghuang gives the Japanese name as "Hō-ō" and notes that "Ho-oh Bird" is a nickname. -Jéské (v^_^v +2 Pen of Editing) 04:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The Japanese writes ホウオウ in List of Pokémon (241-260)#Ho-Oh as it is directly translated Hō-ō. You're ignoring and show disrespect to its origin. But I don't plan to go on the dispute since you're an admin and I have no hope to win. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 04:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The English name of the Pokémon is, indeed, "Ho-Oh", and that is the reason "Ho-Oh" redirects there (as, after all, this *is* the English Wikipedia). Further, I was referring to how the fenghuang article has the name of the creature the Pokémon is based off of transliterated as Hō-ō. Please read the whole section instead of cherry-picking selections for your argument. -Jéské (v^_^v +2 Pen of Editing) 05:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for significant edits to a protected page

    Shortcut

    Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.

    • Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
    • Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{Edit COI}} template should be used.
    • Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
    • If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
    • This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    User talk:64.228.130.220 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection User talk of blocked user, IP is abusing the unblock template, please protect talk page.Momusufan (talk) 05:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I didn't like the fact that he tried to make the page impossible to load by adding cp'd article text to it. Semi-protected for the life of the block (31 hrs).


    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Might I persuade you to semi-protect this page against the IPs who are ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that JLo's new twins, Max and Emme, were named after the main characters of this cartoon, and who are simply BURSTING with the need to add this entirely unsourced info to the article? (Please?).Gladys J Cortez 03:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    3 more pages stalked by User:Breathtaker: Electronic body music (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Dark Wave (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) L'Âme Immortelle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi Protect User:Breathtaker just won't quit. After already having The Cruxshadows, The Birthday Massacre, and Goth Rock semi protected, he has moved on to these three pages. Always jumping from different IPs that begin with 87.122 (we may want to permanently block that node as he really won't quit). Recently, he has made 3 edits to Electronic body music ( 1 2 3), 3 edits to L'Âme Immortelle (1 2 3), & 3 edits to Dark Wave (1 2 3). More than one editor has had to revert these changes.--Dr who1975 (talk) 01:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Agree also, whois on the IP address reveals it's a shared ip. Maybe the range can be blocked as well as protection on the articles. Momusufan (talk) 02:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    User(s) blocked. Hopefully the range block takes care of it. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    User talk:75.1.23.79 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    indefinite full protection User talk of blocked user, User:Mmbabies sockpuppet, please fully block page..Momusufan (talk) 01:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined -- Alexf42 03:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Fully protected After reading your explanation, it is now indef fully protected. -- Alexf42 03:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Please change the protection level of my userpage to autoconfirmed, or none at all if there's some reason why autoconfirmed isn't done. --SaberExcalibur! 02:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Done -Jéské (v^_^v +2 Pen of Editing) 04:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, The article keeps being vandalized by anonymous users; IPs are mostly vandalizing the article. Too much reverting. I think the article needs to be protected..--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--JForget 01:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Just vandalism from anonymous users - I think a temporary semi-protection (for example 2-3 months) would be good. .—αἰτίας •discussion• 01:26, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks! —αἰτίας •discussion• 01:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Vandalism from multiple IP's for the past few days, very few actual contributions.Soxred93 | talk bot 23:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Twice, actually. - Rjd0060 (talk) 23:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    This article was listed for deletion, and VirtualSteve closed that as a "no consensus", which is being appealed at deletion review. Meanwhile after attempts to redirect to John McCain lobbyist controversy, which discusses the issue rather than the rather insignificant person, VirtualSteve has reverted and protected the article in the face of WP:BLP concerns, and refuses to unprotect. I ask for a review of this protection, especially in the light of the strong WP:ONEEVENT case givenin the AfD. An AfD closer cannot surely stop subsequent redirection. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 14:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined This is not the place for review of administrators actions. If you feel the need to report this, please go to WP:AN/I. For what it is worth, I do not see anything wrong with what VirtualSteve did, especially if there are WP:BLP concerns. Just let the deletion review go its course and see what happens. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, Appears to be a highly vandalized image page..scetoaux (talk) (My contributions.) 23:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. bibliomaniac15 23:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary semi-protection , With the album close to release, many leaks, and an (unconfirmed) iTunes tracklist continues to be added. --JpGrB 22:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GBT/C 22:40, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Page has quite a history of vandalism, some recent. .Carter | Talk to me 21:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I've blocked the IP responsible for 99% of today's vandalism. Feel free to relist if other IPs jump on - with that one IP out of the picture I don't think there's enough recent activity to justify protection. GBT/C 22:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for that, but what about the vandals yesterday, the day before etc.... Thank you though for blocking that person. Carter | Talk to me 22:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Gonzofan has protected the page. GBT/C 22:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks guys. Carter | Talk to me 22:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Ahhhhhhhhhh EC times 100!!! Yes I semi'd it due to the recent vandalism after the recent unprotection. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 22:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection , With the current primaries going on, this is a target of vandals because that's what many of the candidates promise. They say that they will bring health care to all, so it is a pretty big topic. .Soxred93 | talk bot 21:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only three incidents of vandalism in last 24 hours, all from same IP, which has now been blocked. GBT/C 22:00, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, Still a target, may never end. Even GH1 is popular, many people still like to vandalize it..Soxred93 | talk bot 21:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GBT/C 21:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection due to the repeated adding of a link to a spam page by IPs and new users (including 201.43.152.251, 200.158.243.183, 201.43.206.164, and Anjohelena). Edits have persisted despite the addition of warning templates to user talk pages. – Zntrip 21:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Icestorm815 • Talk 21:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    ALF page

    Hey, liking the changes you have done. I always wondered why there wasn't more on the band of mercy, as that is where the ALF came from. Just a couple of things I was thinking. Firstly, I think that the 'Extensional self-defense' and 'Animal Rights Militia and other groups' should be a sub topic of 'Evidence of hardening attitude'...as that is all it is.

    Secondly, possibly thinking that the 'ALF formed' should be under 'Band of Mercy', on the basis that it is part of the BOM history, not actually a seperate story. Then it would make more sense to viewers that the ALF came from them. Blueberrypie12 Talk 06:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=195328864"