Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pxma (talk | contribs) at 20:09, 23 November 2007 (Requesting semi-protection of Facebook.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


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

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

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

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


    Current requests for protection

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

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, General vandalism.Ρх₥α 20:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-protection until, say, March (after the release of the third game). The history is full of reverts.--91.121.83.168 (talk) 19:15, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. However, it seems better to prot for a month, not four. If we get SIHULM Syndrome (i.e. large amounts of registered speculative edits) here, come back. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 19:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Dozer0987 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Full-protection requested as indef-blocked user is continuing to vandalize and troll his or her Talk page. Probably a good idea to do the same to his or her User page, too. Thanks! --ElKevbo (talk) 19:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Thomas and Friends - Season 12 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Indefinate Semi-Protection This article is suffering at the hands of IP vandals who continually add unverifiable information and fanfiction. CBFan (talk) 18:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, Almost all edits are either vandalism (or "edit tests") or reversions..Goochelaar (talk) 18:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary full protection. Non-flattering comments about Köchler (including reference to his website) were systematically deleted by anonymous user with IP address in Austria, and (after undo) were again identically deleted by a sock puppet Reg25. I have undone changes.

    The entire Köchler set of postings has significant spam characteristics and needs to be wrested from exclusive control by Köchler and his "International Progress Organization". The contribution histories of other editors of the Köchler page and related pages indicate that they are Köchler acolytes.

    Protection was previously requested and declined. Since then, there has been a further, concerted censorship action deleting fully sourced material about Köchler's consorting with "third world rulers" such as Muammar Gaddhafi, and being appointed an observer at the Lockerbie bombing trial as documented on Köchler's own website (i-p-o.org). These facts are crucial to an understanding of the man's social significance, even though he now prefers to present himself as a pure philosopher. The contribution history of editor Reg25 indicates that he/she is a sock pupper or Köchler-bot.

    Temporary full protection is indicated to avoid Wikipedia being hijacked as a cult promotion vehicle. Thank you. WikiFlier (talk) 17:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 17:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-Protection. Constant vandalism from anonymous IPs, deleting large amounts of sourced material on religious grounds.Kww (talk) 16:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Anthøny 17:11, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection requested per user warnings.Ngchen (talk) 16:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. Anthøny 17:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection requested per user warnings.Ngchen (talk) 16:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. Anthøny 17:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection requested per user warnings.Ngchen (talk) 16:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. Anthøny 17:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection requested per user warnings.Ngchen (talk) 16:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected. Anthøny 17:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:Deeek1111 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    temporary full protection Vandalism, blocked user blanking page to remove warnings and blocks.Mayalld (talk) 16:11, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected indefinitely. That'll fix him Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 16:13, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection requested for a few days to dissuade prolific anonymous vandals. --ElKevbo (talk) 15:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 15:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, IP's keep on having edit wars within adding false actors and many IP's were blocked from editing. This page is under serious protection if this dosen't stop. Cosmona (talk) 15:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.--WinHunter (talk) 15:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    temporary semi-protection Vandalism, IP's recently have gone on a large adding-unsourced-info campaign. One went as far as adding the entirety of season 6. They asserted that there would be new episodes every Friday from Thanksgiving (i.e. today) to February 2008. Needless to say that was a quite a lot of crap to clean up..NF24(radio me!Editor review) 12:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. You may want to put some of these socks up for blocking! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 15:32, 23 November 2007 (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.

    Unprotect please: McClaren sacked minutes ago. See discussion page. Itsmeltc (talk) 10:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)(UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Complete unprotection is not wise at this time. Jmlk17 10:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotect: A user kept constantly removing info of a monster that was going to be in the game and he thought he wasnt going to be in after proof was shown. The page then got protected and the problem was resolved as the monster was confirmed for the game when more proof showed up. The page has been protected for three days and the game already came out. And the future tag needs to be removed. --Naruto134 18:22, 23 November 2007 (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.

    Template:Saw V

    A lot of upcoming sequel titles redirect to the previous movie of the series and to the section that discusses next movies in the series, so why shouldn't this? Protection is unnecessary, and unhelpful for people looking for information. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined. The template you have linked does not exist, and the deletion log is empty for that page. Perhaps you've mistyped? Check Wikipedia:Template messages here for a list of template messages, where you might be able to find the template you intended to make this request for. Anthøny 17:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Isn't it obvious that TheBlazikenMaster is talking about Saw V (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)? – Steel 17:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Done --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 17:56, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    Unprotect Protection is valid due to edit war. However the administrator Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry who performed the protection 1. is a part of the conflicts which have lead to an edit war; and 2. by protecting the article at that particular moment, maintained the vandalism effected by one of the users involved in the edit war. I request that the missing items be reinstated and that administrators that cannot be suspected of conflict of interests look into the issue. More on article's discussion page, header 23, but brace yourselves for some long reading if the editing issues behind the article's editing have to be unravelled. · Michel (talk) 08:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined - I don't see evidence that he took a side. It appears he just protected The Wrong Version, which is what he was supposed to do. Discuss the article contents and try to come to a consensus. Kusma (talk) 10:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection. Non-flattering comments about Köchler (including reference to his website) were systematically deleted by anonymous user with IP address in Austria. I have undone changes. The entire Köchler set of postings has significant spam characteristics and needs to be wrested from exclusive control by Köchler and his "International Progress Organization". The contribution histories of other editors of the Köchler page and related pages indicate that they are Köchler acolytes.

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. east.718 at 08:00, November 23, 2007

    User talk:Cite it or drop it. (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    indefinite full protection User talk of banned user, Vandalism with inappropriate image..GlobeGores (talk) 07:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected by Spebi. east.718 at 07:45, November 23, 2007


    Request page be Salted. request page be salted to avoid re-creation. Tiptoety (talk) 06:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected east.718 at 07:28, November 23, 2007


    Full protection. Edit warring over a period of several days – Gurch 06:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protection Vandalism, Continued anon vandalism encouraged by subject of article.Closedmouth (talk) 03:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. east.718 at 05:47, November 23, 2007

    This article has to be protected. There is vandalism going on.

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SkierRMH (talk) 06:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    temporary full protection Vandalism, Excessive vandalism.Pilotbob (talk) 03:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Metros (talk) 03:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protect. user:RancidRice had been perpetually warned about altering the article for self-promotion and to promote a biased political view and is continuing to vandalize the article. EricJoseph (talk) 02:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined no recent vandalism; dispute with a registered user. TSO1D (talk) 02:50, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    semi-protect. Chronic target for casual (bored) vandalism, mostly inclusion of spam material. Talk page is also a target for spam comments. Cazort (talk) 00:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. Talk page left as is. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 01:01, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk:68.197.62.95 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    Semi-Protection Anon is blanking their page after a block. Icestorm815 (talk) 00:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Already done. by Theresa knott Icestorm815 (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-Protection. The article has been subject to vandalism for several weeks now, see [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] That's 15 vandalism edits by anonymous users in the last 3 weeks. It is getting annoying and should be stopped. Waninge (talk) 23:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Not an overwhelming amount of vandalism. The user(s) on the page seem to be on top of the vandalism, and it isn't very bad. Jmlk17 00:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Semi-Protection' I should have requested this before Thanksgiving, but with the advent of the holiday this article is a concentration for vandalism and the article is now a mess. I'd like to have protection on the article until after the holidays, after which I request for the protection to be removed, thanks.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 22:57, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jmlk17 23:01, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-Protection' He's the referee of the game Scotland-Italy and is the object of serious libel from (presumably) disappointed Scottish fans. The page was fully protected for four days, we hoped that the bad sportmanship displayed would be over by then. Unfortunately not. Since it was unprotected, the page is constantly being vandalised. To make matters worse, most of the vandals talk about the death of Gonzales, making the whole thing very unpleasant. Wikipedia must not be a forum for threats against invidivuals. JdeJ (talk) 22:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Sigh. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 22:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection. Page has been semi-protected a couple of weeks ago when subject was more in the media than currently. High level of vandalism persists. I suggest a longer period, or permanent, semi-protection. I really don't think permanent would be a bad idea for this article. __meco (talk) 22:30, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Maxim 22:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=173338815"