Wikipedia:Requests for page protection
Editing abuse: | Vandalism • 3RR • Long term • ArbCom enforcement • Usernames • Page protection |
---|---|
ISP/IP abuse: | Open proxy • ISP reporting • Sock puppets • Checkuser |
Noticeboards: | Administrators • Incidents • Community sanction • Biographies • Conflict of interest • Fringe theories • Reliable sources |
- WP:RFP redirects here. You may also be looking for Wikipedia:Requests for permission.
This page is for requesting that a page, image or template be fully protected, semi-protected, move-protected or unprotected. Please read up on the protection policy. Full protection is to stop edit warring between multiple users or severe vandalism; semi-protection is usually only for vandalism. Full protection is also used on templates that are frequently used and not in need of frequent edits (this includes most editorial templates; see Wikipedia:High-risk templates).
After a page has been protected, the protection is listed in the page history with a short description indicating why it was protected, and the article is listed on Special:Protectedpages. Further discussion should take place on the Talk page of the article. Admins do not revert back to previous versions of a page fully protected due to edit warring, except to get rid of obvious vandalism.
Instructions
If you would like to request a page to be protected or unprotected, please follow the following steps:
- Add a level 4 header at the TOP of either the protection list or the unprotection list (whichever is appropriate) and place one of the templates from the table below within the header
(for example, for an article use: ===={{la|ARTICLE}}====) - If you are requesting protection, place the type of request (semi-protection, full protection, or move protection) and a brief reason for your request below your header. If you are requesting unprotection, this distinction is not needed.
- Please do not add arbitrary requests for a protection expiry time to your request. If there is a specific reason that a page should be protected for a certain amount of time, such as protecting a usertalk page until the user is unblocked, please make this clear.
- Sign your request with four tildes ~~~~ and save
- Administrators: Please mark reviewed requests with one of the page protection template messages, so that a bot may recognize and move down those entries.
Namespace | To request page protection | To request talk page protection |
---|---|---|
Generic | {{ln|NAMESPACE|PAGE NAME}} | {{lnt|NAMESPACE|PAGE NAME}} |
Article | {{la|ARTICLE}} | {{lat|ARTICLE}} |
Template | {{lt|TEMPLATE}} | {{ltt|TEMPLATE}} |
Wikipedia | {{lw|PAGE}} | {{lwt|PAGE}} |
User | {{lu|PAGE}} | {{lut|PAGE}} |
Category | {{lc|PAGE}} | {{lct|PAGE}} |
Image | {{li|IMAGE}} | {{lit|IMAGE}} |
Portal | {{lp|PORTAL}} | {{lpt|PORTAL}} |
MediaWiki | cannot be unprotected | {{lmt|MESSAGE}} |
Example
===={{la|The weather in London}}====
'''semi-protect'''. High level of IP vandalism. ~~~~
Please place new requests at the top of each section.
This is not the place to discuss or dispute articles, users or policies. If the entry is being used for edit-warring or content disputes, or contains personal attacks or uncivil comments, or any other unrelated discussion, it will be removed from this page immediately. |
Current requests for protection
Request either semi-protection, full protection, or move protection in this section. Check here if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Full protect. Edit war - BLP concerns. WjBscribe 02:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protect - regular vandalism over many days, the vast majority of which has been done by IPs. --Dreaded Walrus t c 02:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 2 months. After 2 months the page will be automatically unprotected--JForget 02:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protect many of General Motors's employees are going on strike making this page at a high risk of vandalism. 02:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Declined – There is not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection at this time. - it's busy right now, but there's no vandalism yet - Alison ❤ 02:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protect +expiry 1 week Semi-protect before this page gets a lot of vandalism, courtesy of jealous football fans. 01:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Declined – There is not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection at this time. - besides, we don't protect articles pre-emptively - Alison ❤ 01:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protect. Repeated addition of a term that I am unable to find any reliable sources for. I believe they may be refering to the fictional weapon used in Neuromancer. - Fosnez 01:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Declined There is virtually no recent activity in that article thus little vandalism that is unnecessary to semi-protect.--JForget 01:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Alexf(Talk/Contribs) 01:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Alexf(Talk/Contribs) 01:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Alexf(Talk/Contribs) 01:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protection The world's second-most used bittorent tracker has been down for two days, promting regular unencyclopedic "updates" on the situation by anonymous IP's. Semi-protection would help keeping the article clean untill the situation calms down a bit. Sfacets 01:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, Anon IPs inserting information that she is supposedly diagnosed with AIDS and has spread it around. The citation being provided is a dead link. Mysteriously, Google has no information on this news. Suspected hoax BLP vandalism..Videmus Omnia Talk 01:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Declined – There is not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection at this time. Only two IPs have added that info so far. · AndonicO Talk 01:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protection +expiry 1 week, Semi-protection: Vandalism, This page has been abused a lot and should be locked for a short while..MasterXC 01:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protection until a discussion is made. The page is not using the correct episode numbers from the Official US and Official Japanese sites (pokemon usa.com / pokemon.co.jp). Episodes 1-276 are incorrect due to the orginal episodes did not contain any Kanji whats so ever. This needs to be semi-protected before its leads to and edit-revert war.
Fully protected - An edit war seems to be going on, and so this warrants full protection, not just semi-protection. Work it out on the talk page, please. SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:56, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protection one week of protection expires, and the anon BLP-violating edits start up again. I suggest longer than a just a week this time. — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 00:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Declined – Pages are not protected pre-emptively. · AndonicO Talk 00:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- maybe I worded that poorly. I was using the present tense for emphasis. THe protection has expired, and anon BLP-violating edits have already resumed. — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 00:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected – Steel 01:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- maybe I worded that poorly. I was using the present tense for emphasis. THe protection has expired, and anon BLP-violating edits have already resumed. — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 00:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Request Semi-protection for as long as allowable. The beginning of the school year coincides with a big jump in the rate of vandalism of the article to a rate similar to last Spring (& Fall 2006 for that matter) before semi-protection was granted. Of the last 100 Edits, 36 were vandalism (deleting significant amounts of material without explanation, only degrading spelling, personal messages, etc.). Thus, more than 70 percent of Edits were for vandalism or reverting vandalism. All of the vandalism was done by newly registered or unregistered users. By eliminating that source of disruption, semi-protect I believe would hasten the improvement of the article. My thanks. --Thomasmeeks 13:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected - I can't semi-protect preventivly per WP:PROTECT. On the other hand there has been a fair amount of vandalism I have semi-pd it for a week. -Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor 23:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- I believe that the answer above is referring to preemptive semi-protect. Wikipedia:Protection policy#Semi-protection says that:
- Semi-protection should not be used: As a preemptive measure against vandalism before any vandalism has occurred. (Emph. added)
- But the above request referred to heavy recent vandalism. Maybe I am missing something. Is there any help on clarification? --Thomasmeeks 01:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- I believe that the answer above is referring to preemptive semi-protect. Wikipedia:Protection policy#Semi-protection says that:
Current requests for unprotection
If you simply want to make spelling corrections or add information to a protected page that is not disputed, and you are not involved in any disputes there, consider simply adding {{Editprotected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page.
If you do want a page unprotected, please try and ask the protecting admin first before making a request here. This is also not the place to dispute a protection.
Check here if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
unprotect it seems that discussion has ceased, so the dispute might have been resolved. Yahel Guhan 05:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I think Barry Bonds's page can be unprotected. The vandalism should be dying down now that Bonds won't be playing for the San Francisco Giants anymore. 02:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Current requests for significant edits to a protected page
- When making requests here, either:
- Provide a good reason for a substantial edit to a protected page. These are only done in exceptional circumstances, or when there is very clear consensus for an edit and continued protection. Please link to the talk page where consensus was reached.
- Demonstrate that there is a clear dispute over a protected page, and that a specific dispute tag would be appropriate to add. Please link to the talk page where the dispute exists.
Note: Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add {{Editprotected}} to the article's talk page if you would like an inconsequential change rather than requesting it here, though most of these should simply wait for unprotection. See also: Category:Wikipedia protected edit requests
At User talk:Punk Boi 8#Block Appeal, there's a link to an archived WP:ANI discussion - the current location of the discussion is: [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive219#User:Punk Boi 8]]. I would like an admin to fix that - since it seems that the WP:ANI discussion is necessary to understand this section. Od Mishehu 15:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Done -- Satori Son 23:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
At User talk:Hkelkar#No Personal Attacks, there's a link to an archived WP:ANI discussion - the current location of the discussion is: [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive155#Xenophobia]]. I would like an admin to fix that - since it seems that the WP:ANI discussion is necessary to understand this section. Od Mishehu 15:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Done -- Satori Son 23:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
At User talk:TareTone#Problematic edits, there's a link to an archived WP:ANI discussion - the current location of the discussion is: [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive136#User:TareTone]]. I would like an admin to fix that - since it seems that the WP:ANI discussion is necessary to understand this section. Od Mishehu 23:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Done -- Satori Son 23:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Need to revert a vandalism...
Giggity Giggity GOO! 04:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Fulfilled/denied requests
full protection +expiry 3 days, Full protection: Vandalism, massive vandalism.-- Kl4m T C 00:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protection, continuous removal of vital information by anon IPs (possibly fanboys who want wasteful separate articles). The article itself has noted the differences between the same character in different incarnations. Vandalized at least five times in the past few days. Please act on this ASAP. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 23:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks. After 3 weeks the page will be automatically unprotected · AndonicO Talk 23:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Full protection needed, persistant sock puppet vandal adding a football club to disambiguation when not relevent, 92 edits since last useful edit. Greg Smith 2 21:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- For the record, the socks appear to belong to banned User:Eir Witt - he of maintaining numerous sleeper accounts in order to evade semi-protection. --Kurt Shaped Box 22:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected. We'll see how it goes with sleepers. – Steel 00:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protect. Sudden spike in IP vandalism. WAVY 10 20:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected – Steel 00:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
full-protect. High level of IP vandalism and ignoring of references by unregistered users intent on perpetuating their POV, despite evidence to the contrary. They do not provide any citations to back up claims, just continually edit while ignoring discussions on the article talk page and their own. Has been ongoing for a number of months and they continually add the same information, despite efforts to enter dialogue. Dan K 19:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
User blocked – Steel 23:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
full protection Protection, Archived version of my talk page.—Ignatzmicetalkcontribs 18:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Declined, no pressing need for protection. – Steel 23:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please unprotect the MediaDefender page. I've asked the editor that semi protected it to unprotect it here and invited him to a discussion here but he's not inclined to unprotect it. If no one is prepared to unprotect it, I'd appreciate it if you could point me to the right place to dispute a page's protection. I've read the protection policy pages but can only find info on discussing it with the editor that protected or just asking that it be unprotected on this page Neververyvery 21:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if nobody else is willing to unprotect it based on the article history or the likelihood it'll get vandalized if unprotected, then you might want to either wait a bit or talk more with the protecting editor. -Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 21:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- OK. Thanks for the info. Neververyvery 23:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Declined, per the Swatjester discussion. – Steel 23:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protection, heavy vandalism from IP addresses and several user accounts. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 22:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected Obviously, the unprotection didn't work, so I've returned to indefinite semi-protection.--JForget 22:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protection It's just come off a three month semi-protection (among others) and has received at least a dozen vandal edits in a week by anon IP's. --Adamrush 21:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks. After 3 weeks the page will be automatically unprotected · AndonicO Talk 23:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Try unprotect My user page has been semi-protected since April 2007, a few weeks before I got my username renamed. I would like to try unprotecting my user page to see how it goes since registered users has not been vandalizing my user page at all and I don't get my talk page vandalized that often. NHRHS2010 Talk 22:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Unprotected--JForget 23:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protection page being attacked by user:Eir Witt sock puppets therefore I'd like protection. I presume it is connected to VICS as requested below.
Semi-protected Acalamari 22:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protection +expiry 1 week, Semi-protection: Vandalism, since protection was lifted.~Eliz81(C) 21:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a week. Acalamari 22:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protection +expiry 1 week, Semi-protection: Vandalism, nothing but vandalism/edit tests and their reverts since the protection lifted..~Eliz81(C) 21:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a week. Acalamari 21:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Full Protection (for a period of 1 week): There is an edit war between two editors and requires protection due to the fact that they are pretty much reverting each other, however, it has not reached the point where someone has violated 3RR. Both editors have been warned about 3RR, but I feel that without a full protection on the article this edit war will become quite disruptive. nattang 21:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 1 week. After 1 week the page will be automatically unprotected take a trip to the talk page, resolve the problem. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 21:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protection Seems to have been under siege from IPs and new users this evening. Not sure if they've all been bwarned/blocked, so a brief period of semi-protection will hopefully make them re-consider. David Underdown 21:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected as mentioned below. Acalamari 21:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protection Constant drive-by nonsense from IPs after being unprotected on September 17. Spellcast 21:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for three weeks. Acalamari 21:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
'Semi-protect. Outbreak of mass vandalism - 30ish edits from half a dozen IPs in the last couple of hours. On a forum used by local kids perhaps? Iain99Balderdash and piffle 20:55, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a week. Acalamari 21:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
'Semi-protect. Much vandalism by IP addresses. glennb28 t • c 20:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for two weeks. Acalamari 20:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
and
Semi protection - vandalism by IP. [1] --h2g2bob (talk) 17:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Declined There are only two IP addresses vandalizing. · AndonicO Talk 18:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected the user page. Acalamari 21:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Full protect. Two people are engaged in an edit and revert war over some biographical information. I request that the page is to be fully protected until both sides can reach a conclusion. FamicomJL 19:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi protection. A set of anon. IP users have been adding unsourced information to the article and won't stop reverting it. Semi protection is requested to avoid vandalic acts and to encourage users that might be interested in the topic to register and that way keep a log of possible 3RR violations. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 19:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Declined – There is not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection at this time. I only see around three vandals in the past six days. Warn them instead, and they'll likely stop vandalizing. · AndonicO Talk 20:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Full protect. High level of IP and unregistered user bowdlerization, NPOV-violation, and misleading citations, including 3RR violations by individual users, many users contributing to making exactly the same changes over a dozen times, eviscerating or entirely removing entire "Controversies" section over a dozen times, over the past several days. Old semi-protect request changed to full protect request based on disposition of request for Nick Coleman (columnist) (see below), with similar recent history. - Reaverdrop (talk/nl) 19:06, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
semi-protection +expiry 1 day, Semi-protection: Vandalism, Repeated vandalism by IPs in the 168.99.6 area and 168.99.68 area.—Ignatzmicetalkcontribs 18:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a week. Acalamari 18:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Unprotect. Fully protected eight months ago due to a "dispute". I can't find any evidence of that dispute, and I certainly don't see why it needs to remain protected now. The administrator who protected the page also made substantial changes to it immediately beforehand, so shouldn't have intervened even if there had been a dispute – 17:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)