→Current requests for protection: The Suite Life of Zack & Cody (semi-protection) |
Requesting full protection of User talk:ClickyBat53. |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Current requests for protection== |
==Current requests for protection== |
||
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}} |
{{Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/PRheading}} |
||
==== {{lut|ClickyBat53}} ==== |
|||
'''indefinite full protection''' ''User talk of banned user'', '''Indef. blocked user'''. Making personal attacks towards the blocking admin on talk page..[[User:Rjd0060|Rjd0060]] ([[User talk:Rjd0060|talk]]) 16:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==== {{la|The Suite Life of Zack & Cody}} ==== |
==== {{la|The Suite Life of Zack & Cody}} ==== |
Revision as of 16:50, 24 December 2007
Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here. | |
---|---|
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 |
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 |
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.
User talk:ClickyBat53 ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite full protection User talk of banned user, Indef. blocked user. Making personal attacks towards the blocking admin on talk page..Rjd0060 (talk) 16:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
The Suite Life of Zack & Cody (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protection There have been at least 5 vandalisms in the past 24 hours from varying ips.--Rockfang (talk) 16:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Christian Conventions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
temporary full protection,One user (trv9683) is consistently making unverified edits to this article. Editors have tried to engage this user on the Talk page without success. We don't wish the user to not make edits, but simply to read and discuss and follow wiki policy wrt to NPOV, and Verifiability. I have reverted his/ her edits many times. User also added another article which was speedily deleted. Slofstra (talk) 16:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
List of people and organizations associated with Dominionism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Full; BLP concerns. Will (talk) 15:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Will has repeatedly removed content from the article, and seems unwilling to discuss his edits. Now that he is up against the 3RR he is asking for protection. He is using the lack of sources to argue for deletion of the page, while removing the sources he claims aren't there. The page is being editing actively in a constructive fashion by both sides of the dispute, Will is the only on who sees the need to repeatedly remove content without explanation. His rationale also suggests that he does not understand the topic. Guettarda (talk) 15:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Yugioh the abridge series is NOTABLE ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite full protection Vandalism, trolling.The Evil Spartan (talk) 15:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Phil Theis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi or full protection, requesting again. Guys become a meme from his youtube videos, now people are posting that he's dead which has to be a WP:BLP problem.«»bd(talk stalk) 14:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Dick Roche (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Joe Behan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
An anonymous user has been repeatedly adding unsourced POV commentary to the articles on Irish politicians Dick Roche and Joe Behan. This was reverted several times by me and by other editors per WP:BLP, and when the anon created an account Thornintheside (talk · contribs) to continue the vandalism after the IP was blocked, I blocked Thornintheside. The anon has now returned from another IP, and the vandalism looks set to continue when IP addresses change, so please could the articles be semi-protected? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Streatham and Clapham High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
A single user continues to heavily vandalize Streatham and Clapham High School. The text added always amounts to the same wording over its evolution, although the user has gone by various aliases in the past (currently Mary170.5, previously Mary170 (now banned), Mary17, and the UK-based IP addresses 86.147.235.127, 90.208.99.73). I have no connection to this school (I am a random US-based vandalism patroller), and have taken this page on as one of my pet projects, but I'm getting sick of repeatedly having to revert the same vandalism over and over. Something needs to be done to protect this page.
This is repeated vandalism by the same person who has been warned many times and banned at least once. I'm not going to keep this on my watchlist much longer if some better protection can't be added.
Thanks, ΨνPsinu 12:33, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
User:Jeuan ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, vandalism; no reason for anyone other than author to edit this page..The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined - page speedily deleted as nonsense, user has no contributions. Kusma (talk) 13:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Alien vs. Predator (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protect. Repeated vandalism to a referenced quotation from a number of IPs, despite repeated warnings, over a period of 2 weeks. IllaZilla (talk) 10:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Miguel Cotto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Mh29255 (talk) 10:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:16, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Big Bang (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Mh29255 (talk) 09:35, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jmlk17 09:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Cunt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protect. Consistent IP-vandalism by people who do not seem to be very grown up. Vandalism has been going on for a few days now. --Fromgermany (talk) 09:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jmlk17 09:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Nancy Reagan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protect. Rampant vandalism from multiple users. Please protect! Happyme22 (talk) 08:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Nicole Richie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Temporary semi protection Vandalism, One month of semi protection requested due to anonymous IP/new user vandalism. Vandalism has been fairly steady since page protection was lifted about a week ago. Pinkadelica (talk) 07:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let's try just two weeks for now. Jmlk17 08:30, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Christmas Eve (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi-protection Lots of vandalism as we approach Christmas Eve, please protect. Happy Holidays! --Hdt83 Chat 07:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 08:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
List of zombie films (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Temporary semi-protection: An anonymous user keeps inserting the film I Am Legend onto the list without giving reasons, even though other editors have provided reasons why the film should not appear on the list. If people want to engage in discussion as to why one edit is better, that's great, but edit warring without providing policy-based/source-based reasons is wrong. The page had been reverted several times in recent days, but outright edit warring has erupted in the past day. The anonymous user was blocked for 3RR violation (9 reverts in one day), but the same edits have begun again under a different anonymous user address, so the block has not helped. Doczilla (talk) 07:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- User(s) blocked. If they come back under another IP, please come back. :) Jmlk17 08:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Solitaire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi-protection: A certain inappropriate link originally posted by Davidutipu (talk · contribs) has been removed several times before, only to be reinstated by anons. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 07:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 07:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
System of a Down (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
temporary semi protection , The main article of the band, as well as the individual band member articles are being heavily link-spamed by an anon. user, .VartanM (talk) 05:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jmlk17 05:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Nancy Reagan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protect. It's today's featured article on the main page and because there's a lot of IP vandalism, protection for today would really help. Happyme22 (talk) 03:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined Today's featured article is almost never protected. -- Flyguy649 talk 03:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Premodernity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Full protection Vandalism, Very frequent vandalism within the past year, from both very new registered users and IP users. Sntigar (talk) 09:31, 23 December 2007
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Snowolf How can I help? 02:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Hitman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Very frequent vandalism within the past ten days, from both very new registered users and IP users. Kakofonous (talk) 02:17, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. jj137 ♠ 02:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've posted a last warning on User:Terminator962001's talk (as it seems a vandal-only account, but let's give him a chance). If s/he persevere, feel free to report to WP:AIV. Snowolf How can I help? 02:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Personally I don't think there's much need for protection, 4 vandalisms (apart from Terminator's) aren't much IMHO. Snowolf How can I help? 02:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Pope John Paul II (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi-Protection: Several IP vandalizing edits that are blanking content. Groupthink (talk) 02:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm going to sit on this one for a couple hours and see if I can hand out a rangeblock. east.718 at 02:13, December 24, 2007
- Declined, vandalism has stopped. east.718 at 02:28, December 24, 2007
Chris Benoit double murder and suicide (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi-Protection Getting vandalized by multiple IP's. TJ Spyke 01:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Flyguy649 talk 01:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Markydolphin4678910 ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite full protection User talk of banned user, Mark753 again edit can be view here..Rgoodermote 00:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Fully protected -- Flyguy649 talk 00:55, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
United States Department of Homeland Security (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
temporary semi-protection Vandalism, misc ip's continues to add something like the following in the past 24 hours: They have also been known to edit pages on wikipedia I have reverted and another editor just reverted.Jeanenawhitney (talk) 00:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. jj137 ♠ 00:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Markydolphin45 ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite full protection User talk of banned user, Another talk page of another sock of User:Mark753. attacks here.Rgoodermote 00:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Dooperpooper ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite full protection User talk of banned user, User has been blocked because of the users name. User has since used talk page in a disruptive manner. view edits here.Rgoodermote 00:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Deuxdecimaltriangle ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite full protection User talk of banned user, The user has been discovered to be a sock of User:Mark753. The user has made continued attacks against several administrators using their talk page. the attacks in question. .Rgoodermote 00:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Rachel Marsden (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protection more IP nonsense. Church of the Sub-Genie (talk) 15:33, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Request for reversion and semi-protection of the Rachel Marsden page to the "pre-edit war" version of December 10, 2007. People are posting allegations that are neither proven nor substantiated. Allegations minus a charge, conviction, or even arrest are nothing but gossip and in violation of Wiki standards and practices. Republicon (talk) 1:33, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Republicon. People should NOT be posting criminal allegations without even an arrest or a charge. Seems the Dec 10/07 version of the article is the non-defamatory one to which this article should be reverted and semi-protected lolzing (talk) 4:26, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- First, an apology. In making my last edit, I inadvertently violated the 3RR policy. I note that Republicon (talk · contribs) has already reverted my edit. For the time being, I'll limit my participation to the discussion page. I encourage Republicon and lolzing (talk · contribs) to join the discussion. I add that the material in question is sourced through the Toronto Star and Salon.com, two reliable sources, and its inclusion is in no way a violation of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Victoriagirl (talk) 20:10, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Fully protected by user:Moreschi. Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 00:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Halo: Combat Evolved (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protection Lots of vandalizm. Footballfan190 (talk) 04:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 4 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. jj137 ♠ 04:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Current requests for unprotection
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.
Template:Country data Montenegro (edit | [[Talk:Template:Country data Montenegro|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I need to add content. I also see no reason for the template's protection. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Blu-ray Disc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Please unprotect this page. The discussion is clearly in favour of not including the 'image' in question (See Blu-ray Disc discussion) - which was the reason for the protection. I recommend we make it semi-protected until the dispute is solved, as it has cooled down now, and from discussion its easy to see the result. Would really appreciate it.
- Declined It doesn't seem as if any discussion has resolved the issue yet. Jmlk17 08:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Indo-European languages (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The full protect on Indo-European languages is a clear case of admin abuse to me. The protection was not requested according to the procedure to protect a page. There was no serious edit warring involved and the protection only serves the content dispute of the administrator. Please unprotect, or reverse to the version that corresponds to what has been discussed in TALK first. Rokus01 (talk) 03:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Whatever the reasons not to unprotect, it won't increase credibility or confidence to keep protection enforced, not to the institute nor to the people involved: obviously this protection was directed to my edits, even though they were discussed thoroughly over a long time and I did not engage in editwarring to have some improvements enforced. Three edits in a month and all discussed, no way anyone would be so innocent to swallow this! This action is a sham and lacks all features of independent adminship. I suggest User:Angr comes up to give some explanation soon to avoid being seriously involved in a cabalcase. Yes, this is going way too far. Rokus01 (talk) 14:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Xbox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
There is no edit war going on and the discussion page is barely being touched. I really think unprotection would be safe. If unprotected, I will watch this page. Footballfan190 (talk) 02:59, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Current requests for significant edits to a protected page
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:GlassCobra/Editor for deletion ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite semi-protection , This is to prevent personal attacks and incivility from arising..Marlith 17:01, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- It is a user subpage. They can be semi'd at request, right? - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- The owner should request it. Also, it is unclear why IPs should be locked out of "fun" pages like this unless vandalism becomes a problem (a signle incident is not a problem). Kusma (talk) 17:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, maybe the "owner" should be the one to request it. But for your second point, it seems irrelevant per the protection policy ("User pages (but not user talk pages), when requested by the user."). - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, this one is pretty much supposed to be a public page (unlike most user subpages - the policy is probably thinking of pages only the owner usually edits), so I don't think it is appropriate to lock some people out of it. But per the letter of the protection policy, GlassCobra can request protection. Kusma (talk) 17:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Let the owner request it. Simple as that. I don't see the point when I saw all of one IP edit in the last 50 contribs. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- However this is to put the fire out before it starts. Personal attacks can make users alltogether leave the project. We don't want that do we? Marlith 17:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- To be fair, this should most probably be MfD'd anyway - it's clearly a waste of resources. There's no need for semi protection at the minute - request it if something actually happens. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- We don't preventively protect pages for incidents that may happen in the future but haven't happened yet. Metros (talk) 17:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- However this is to put the fire out before it starts. Personal attacks can make users alltogether leave the project. We don't want that do we? Marlith 17:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Let the owner request it. Simple as that. I don't see the point when I saw all of one IP edit in the last 50 contribs. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, this one is pretty much supposed to be a public page (unlike most user subpages - the policy is probably thinking of pages only the owner usually edits), so I don't think it is appropriate to lock some people out of it. But per the letter of the protection policy, GlassCobra can request protection. Kusma (talk) 17:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, maybe the "owner" should be the one to request it. But for your second point, it seems irrelevant per the protection policy ("User pages (but not user talk pages), when requested by the user."). - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think the page will be okay for now. If something happens, I'll protect it myself. GlassCobra 20:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- The owner should request it. Also, it is unclear why IPs should be locked out of "fun" pages like this unless vandalism becomes a problem (a signle incident is not a problem). Kusma (talk) 17:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- It is a user subpage. They can be semi'd at request, right? - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:65.2.32.206 ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
temporary semi-protection User talk of banned user, Continued blanking of page and adding of gibberish messages by the IP. Suggest protect until IP's block has been lifted..Rgoodermote 21:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done Spebi 21:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Al-Qaeda (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Full; edit-war. Will (talk) 20:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Fully protected indefinitely. —Kurykh 20:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:Sockerknopper ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite full protection User talk of banned user, Indef. blocked user making personal attacks on his talk page..Rjd0060 (talk) 16:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Gustave Whitehead (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The article Gustave Whitehead is now being attacked/vandalized. Please study the discussion page for it and see how a long time cooperation between earlier editors has resulted in an article editors agree about. Note that the article is very controversial to a lot of people because of the 100 year long controversy between supporters for Wright brothers and Smithsonian and supporters for Whitehead. By attacking the main article about Whitehead many references to this article are denigrated. The first attacker moved pictures around randomly, breaking the connection between a picture and the text about it. The second attacker moved a picture and gave the reason that there was a big white space, but his change made the white space bigger, so his reasoning is faulty. I ask for full protection of the page. Roger491127 (talk) 15:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined -- can't see any non-constructive editing, dispute seems to be caused by different browsers displaying images differently. No need to lock editing. Kusma (talk) 17:07, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
User:220.255.4.133 ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, long term abuse across many IPs, and many userpages, by the same sock. Please protect this page..The Evil Spartan (talk) 10:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Already protected. (Semi) by User:NrDg till March, I do see the need of extending it now. --WinHunter (talk) 15:15, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:CatisAbomb ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
full protection Vandalism, trolling.The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.--WinHunter (talk) 15:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:116.14.86.42 ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
full protection Dispute, long term abuse across many IPs, and many userpages, by the same sock. Please protect this page..The Evil Spartan (talk) 10:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Already protected. (Semi) by User:Spebi, full protection is not necessary at this point. --WinHunter (talk) 15:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
User talk:121.7.203.74 ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
temporary semi-protection Vandalism, 3 months - more abuse by the same sockpuppeteer..The Evil Spartan (talk) 10:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done Spebi 10:26, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Blessthefall (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
semi-protection The lead singer of the band has recently quit, resulting in many false entries as to whom the new singer is. Has even resulted in the band placing a notice on their Myspace blog, stating that the entries are false. ~Ambrosia- talk 07:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Seems to have let up a bit. Come back when it flares up again. —Kurykh 07:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Fort Banks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
full protection Dispute.. Cheers_Ad@m.J.W.C. (talk) 06:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - declined, what are you talking about? Only you have edited the page. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Global warming (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Full protect Nearly constant edit war by people who should really know better. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 06:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 07:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Arab (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Full protect Continuous edit war with no discussion on talk page. --Strothra (talk) 06:28, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined Not seeing much of an edit war, Strothra, just you reverting a lot. The person you are reverting has taken it to the talkpage, I suggest you attempt to continue the discussion before seeking administrative intervention again. ~ Riana ⁂ 07:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Spells in Harry Potter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi protect Constant edit warring, reverting between users and IPs - not on and not wiki policy. --Shaggy9872004 (talk) 06:54, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. You haven't seen that article when it's really bad, this is hardly anything. GlassCobra 06:56, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
11th millennium and beyond (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Surge of vandalism to the dates by multiple ips. Me and User:Arthur Rubin have both reached 3 reverts. See page history..Thinboy00 @272, i.e. 05:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 31 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ongoing ISP thru the last day. SkierRMH (talk) 05:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Waterboarding (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
reduce from full protection to semi-protection Person asked for full protection. He was reverting changes. I was participating on Talk page and seeking consensus. He got article how he wanted it and then requested full protection. At time of full protection discussions on Talk page were civil and constructive moving toward consensus. Wikipedia policy favors lowered protection level unless facts clearly demand higher protection level. Shibumi2 (talk) 15:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)