Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Big Bird (talk | contribs) at 19:10, 19 December 2008 (→{{la|H...A...G...G...E...R ?}}: indent). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


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

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

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

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


    Current requests for protection

    Place requests for protection increases at the BOTTOM of this section. If you cannot find your request, check the archive of requests or, failing that, the page history. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

    Two week semi-protection Constant attempts to add charts that fail WP:BADCHARTS from IP range 201.17.0.0/16. Otherwise productive range, large Brazilian ISP, dynamic IPs, so range block isn't a good answer.—Kww(talk) 19:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite create-protection, Of course, this page has no purpose and will most likely not be created for a long time. When I clicked the link to it in my moves log, the screen pulled up the edit tools and box instead of disabling the edit tab.SchfiftyThree (talk!) 18:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. This page was created once more than 2 months ago. There is no justification for a protection. — Aitias // discussion 18:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Pages such as H...A...G...G...E...R ? are created in a disruptive fashion by the well known sockpuppeteer and vandal User:Grawp. He creates and, after deletion, recreates such pages until they're fully protected. Any new sockpuppet he creates is blocked on sight and it has become fairly common practice to protect his HAGGER variation pages from recreation. Examples: HAGGER?, H.A.G.G.E.R.?, .њ.а.6.6ея ?, .њ.а.6.6.ея?, *H'Ā'G'G'ĖR ?, *H'Ā'G'GĖR?, H'Ā'G'G'ĖR?. Article titles such as these have no foreseeable use other than to allow Grawp to come back and recreate them if he's allowed to do so. I would say it's advisable to protect this. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Have to agree there. Very surprised to see this protection request declined.—Kww(talk) 19:06, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, POV pushing by IP to evade temporary block; see User talk:98.174.219.202, User talk:98.174.219.204. User also has shown vandalizing interest in Commonwealth (United States). One-month semi-protection is probably long enough for the individual in question to lose interest and move on with his life..RJC TalkContribs 17:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection Persistant IP vandalism.--Ipatrol (talk) 17:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 4 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Aitias // discussion 17:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection vandalism, Anonymous user insists on adding erroneous category.RedCoat10 • talk 16:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. — Aitias // discussion 17:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Occasional but persistent vandalism. Recent repeated deletions by non user despite requests for explanation Edkollin (talk) 16:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 16:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Long semi-protection please. Daily vandalism. DocteurCosmos (talk) 15:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 16:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Already protected. indefinitely by User:Hiberniantears. — Aitias // discussion 16:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    full protection user talk of blocked user, Continues soap-boxing. .Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 14:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, 80 revisions in a little over a week [1]. All additional info is from IPs, and it is all being reverted by registered users. This will continue until the Royal Rumble 2009, so a month's semi-protection would help. .Darrenhusted (talk) 13:01, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 14:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protect - Article is under concerted vandal attack. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 12:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. by another admin. --VS talk 12:39, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. Constant addition of unsourced speculation and incorrect info from ips. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 11:28, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Just as a note, I have explained this matter surrounding this user and wanting page protection on admin LA'Quatique's talkpage as noted here [2].

    Just so that its clear, NiciVampire is in disagreement with myself and three other users who have tried to include an edit in past weeks. My edit reads 'Priceless & Legacy era' as the title of a section while her edit reads 'Alliance with DiBiase and Manu; angle with Orton (2008-present)'. She has continually objected to my edit on the talkpage because she said it doesn't have a reliable source. A reliable source was found by another user here [3] yet she is now requesting page protection despite there are no edits being made to the page but just discussion on talkpages. I'd like to note that she is on her third revert while I only have made two before I tried just discussing the matter. Cheers dude (talk) 12:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Actually, I was requesting page protection due to vandalism from ips. You are not an ip. I would also appreciate a little good faith. I would request page protection due to a disagrement that I am having with another user, and I resent that implication. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 12:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    As the page protection idea came in the midst of a talkpage dispute involving you not believing something is sourced (when a source has been found) and doing so at this advisal [4], as well as remarking unsourced speculations in your reasoning above, I naturally assumed that you were trying get page protection to prevent the addition of the edit that you have been objecting to for weeks. Just to note, the most recent edit made to the page was by Darrenhusted who recently bursted into the matter rather uncivily [5] which is why I have gone to an admin about it. Cheers dude (talk) 12:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    There is no dark conspiracy here, in fact in October I requested a protect for Jeff Hardy because I could see Nici was swamped by edits. I suggested a protect because from the 9th to the 19th IPs were making edits and Nici was reverting alone. Cheers dude is willfully misunderstanding the situation, and using this page to comment on a situation which is already on 3 talk pages. I think a month's semi-protection would be helpful at this point. Darrenhusted (talk) 12:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --VS talk 12:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism and unwillingness to discuss on talk page. Disamb page needs to guide casual WP readers, by specifying which one of the songs listed is the one sung by X Factor UK winner - readers will not necessarily know it is the Cohen song unless this is stated. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello.......??? Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:39, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary create-protection, Author has recreated this article 3 times, after CSD for A7.OliverTwisted 05:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected The Helpful One 14:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary-full-protection. Continuous reversions by a sock puppet of Wikipéire. Cheers. The € • T/C 04:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for unprotection

    Shortcuts

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

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

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

    Unprotection, protected since 12/17/2007, very little vandalism in most recent history.Andrewlp1991 (talk) 07:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already unprotected. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 16:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Shortcut

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

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

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    semi-protect of this talk page required due to regular vandalism of some anon user who wants the main page unprotected! Michellecrisp (talk) 11:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. — Aitias // discussion 11:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism in the past four hours. At least 7 different IP addresses, new to Wikipedia, are adding "She died", "Dead" etc. over and over adding 300-600KB of information to the article with each edit. Aspects (talk) 10:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Aitias // discussion 11:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary create-protection, 4th creation of deleted article in the last 2 hours. Using different usernames. Needs to take a break..OliverTwisted 10:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Already done. — Aitias // discussion 11:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protect. IP vandalism every few minutes. Elbutler (talk) 00:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. — Aitias // discussion 11:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Unprotection was already requested, and declined by User:Tanthalas39, however, that was with the advice that I should write something up and re-post it. So, that page is located here, User:MMORTSLover/Beyond_Protocol. User:Tanthalas39 then said he wanted another admin's ruling on it. If this is in any way against procedure, I apologize, but I did not get a finite answer. The following was my original request for unprotection. MMORTSLover (talk) 15:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    This is a PC Game, which is a part of a rare genre. The page has been protected (and blank) since before its launch, by a user who has not contributed anything since July (if memory serves)... The game is very unique and has a steady following. Please un-protect it so that something can be posted about it. Thanks. MMORTSLover (talk) 14:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Drcwright (talk) 07:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --VS talk 08:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    semi-protection. someone claiming to be the article subject [6] is editing this with large chunks of uncited statements. Michellecrisp (talk) 05:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --VS talk 08:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary create-protection, Article has been created twice only for malicious attack purposes, despite warnings and deletions.OliverTwisted 05:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Ruslik (talk) 08:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Temporary semi-protection Repeated vandalism from IP with no response to messages on talk page. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 03:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for 24 hrs. EdwinHJ | Talk 07:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Semi-protected (tagging for bot) -Jéské Couriano (v^_^v) 07:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Sustained IP vandalism..tgies (talk) 03:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one day. Tiptoety talk 04:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Almost daily vandalism, mainly after December 10, 2008.-- IRP ☎ 02:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of six hours. Tiptoety talk 04:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Unprotection, This article has been semi-protected since March due to vandalism. It may be time to attempt unprotection again..DoubleBlue (talk) 01:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. Other admins may have varying mileage, but pages are experiencing more vandalism as Wikipedia grows in stature and popularity, not less. The protection log for this page is miles long. There's really no reason to unprotect this page - if someone wants to edit it, they can make an account, request an edit at WP:PER, or post to the talk page of the article itself. Tan | 39 01:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. --Philcha (talk) 17:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Not a whole lot of vandalism. However, vandalism did continue immediately after the last protection expired, and about 100% of the edits since the last protection have had to be reverted. - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    This is a PC Game, which is a part of a rare genre. The page has been protected (and blank) since before its launch, by a user who has not contributed anything since July (if memory serves)... The game is very unique and has a steady following. Please un-protect it so that something can be posted about it. Thanks. MMORTSLover (talk) 14:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, for now. Create a referenced article - showing notability - in your userspace, and repost here. Tan | 39 15:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Not to be rude, but you may want to check out a user's userspace before saying that and stamping it with a "no".
    User:MMORTSLover/Beyond Protocol - This is what I have initially. The game is most notable for the improvements it has made on other failed titles in the genre. Please post criticism and/or necessary fixes. MMORTSLover (talk) 15:31, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Was I supposed to guess that you already had this written? At any rate, what do other admins think here? I'm too irritated at this guy for that comment that someone else can make this decision. Tan | 39 15:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Well I am sorry for irritating you, but if that's the worst you've gotten recently, please reveal to me the secret for such an easy life! Just pointing out, that it is one of four pages linked on my main page, no guess work needed, but a cursory glance might not hurt :) MMORTSLover (talk) 16:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Still haven't had a definitive answer and the bot recognized this request as old. Thanks! MMORTSLover (talk) 15:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Request temporary lowering of protection to semiprotection to facilitate some maintenance/overhaul to the template. Will request full protection again when it is finished and fully tested. Martin 12:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, Use {{Editprotected}}, and make your changes in a sandbox, for example: Template:Chemicals/Sandbox and an admin will sync the sandbox, template is used far too much to be unprotected. The Helpful One 13:04, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I would like it semiprotected please. It is likely to need tweaking and adjusting and so editprotected is not suitable. It is on my watchlist and any possible vandalism (although unlikely) would be reverted soon. Thanks, Martin 18:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=259019874"