Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AnnerTown (talk | contribs) at 02:57, 17 February 2014. 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 remove obvious vandalism.


    Request addition of protection to a page, or increasing the current protection level

    Request removal of protection from a page, or reducing the current protection level

    Request a specific edit be made to a protected page
    Please add an edit request to the talk page of the protected page before adding an edit request here

    Current requests for increase in protection level

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

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism since the article has been created, which seems to be increasing now that the ACLU has gotten involved in the lawsuit. AnnerTown (talk) 02:57, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – 3 months; target of at least 4 attacks of vandalism in the last month (insertion of names, song lyrics, content deletion) by multiple IP editors. LT910001 (talk) 02:08, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 02:50, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism in this controversial article. Cadiomals (talk) 21:36, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions by anon IP editors. Also disruptive IP hopper. STATic message me! 20:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:35, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Some editors removed content without explanation. Fortunately, I recovered content. George Ho (talk) 18:41, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: After the semi-protection ran out, IP vandalism started up again. --Jaellee (talk) 18:08, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – An editor keeps on removing the redirect. There is no reason for this redirect to be edited. Finealt (talk) 17:48, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    • Non-Admin Comment the requestor has deleted the content replacing it with a redirect and been revert, the re-deleted and redirected again some six days later and again been reverted and undone- without a merge/redirect/afd having taking place. WP:BRD is needed by Finealt, page doesnt need protection. I will undo the blanking of content, seemingly against consensus. Murry1975 (talk) 18:11, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Disagree - it's not "an editor", it's several different editors. YOU are choosing to repeatedly blank this page and replace it with redirects to unrelated articles - first the US channel, then a different channel in the UK which tangentially mentions this one on its article page. Your entire edit history is removing content, blanking and deleting articles with no discussion or consensus, and in most cases the reasons which you make these changes are wrong. To request page protection because a number of different editors disagree with you is clearly an abuse of the process. Bonusballs (talk) 18:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP hopper persistently adding unsourced content to the infobox. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Kids' Choice Awards articles

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandal repeatedly adding unsourced material. SummerPhD (talk) 16:58, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – to prevent unregistered users from committing vandalism. Vjmlhds 14:26, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

    Permanent semi-protection: The temporary semi-protection from IP editing expired on the 11th and we've already had someone come on to vandalize the page again. It might seem a bit early but I can guarantee that the IP vandalism will only continue each time it's unprotected. This is probably one of the more often vandalized book pages out there. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:51, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Should the page experience additional vandalism, then it would be reasonable to protect it. As for now it's too early to do so. Mike V • Talk 01:51, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    Shortcuts

    Before posting a request for unprotection, please discuss it with the protecting administrator first. You can create a request below only if you receive no response from them.

    To find out which administrator protected the page, go to the page's edit history and click on the "View logs for this page" link (located underneath the page's title). The protecting administrator is listed in the protection log entry, next to the words "protected", "changed protection level", or "configured pending changes". If there are a large number of log entries on the page, use the drop-down menu near the top of the page and select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" to filter the logs accordingly.

    DO NOT request a reduction in protection if...

    • ...you are being prevented from editing the page. A desire to change content is not a valid reason for unprotection. Instead:
      • If you can edit the article's talk page, use the WP:Edit Request Wizard to propose a change on the article's talk page. Include an explanation of the exact content that you want to change, and what the content will be afterward.
      • If the article's talk page is protected, you may propose a change at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit.
    • ...your reasoning for reducing protection is that the article has not been vandalized. That simply means the protection is working as intended.
    • ...your reasoning for reducing protection is basically "a long time has passed" without supporting details.
    • ...you haven't contacted the protecting administrator.

    You may request a protection reduction below if...

    • ...you want to change the protection level of a template or module from full protection to template protection. You may add the request to this page without having to discuss it with the protecting administrator first.
    • ...you need to remove creation protection from a location where no page exists (redlinked pages) after a draft version of the intended article is prepared beforehand and ready to be published.
    • ...you are proposing a trial reduction in protection for a page that has been protected for several years, provided the proposal is supported by evidence such as talk page activity, page views, page traffic, number of watchers, frequency of edit requests, and prior history of vandalism.
    • ...the protecting administrator is inactive or has not responded to you in several days.

    If you cannot locate your request, make sure to check the request archives to see if it's been moved there. Only requests that have been recently answered will still be listed here.

    Unprotection: not full, just the PC. Unneeded when it was intended to be indefinitely semi-protected. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 23:59, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Done Mark Arsten (talk) 01:24, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Template protected Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Template protected Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:39, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Template protected Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Chemical element symbol templates

    Template-editor: Appears NuclearWarfare protected these en masse (though Hydroxide was from DragonflySixtyseven). Requesting these so I am able to move them into other categories. I posted a message about this on NuclearWarfare's talk page but haven't heard back yet. meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 05:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    @NuclearWarfare: They don't seem to be used much (first two have no transclusions) anymore so I'm included to unprotect. What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callanecc (talk • contribs) 05:36, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests
    Shortcut

    Requests for specific edits should be made on the talk page of the protected article. You can create an edit request below only if the talk page is also protected, preventing you from adding a request there.

    Otherwise, this is the correct place to use in order to add an edit request if you are unable to add one to the article's talk page. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to properly add a request.

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    A rolling archive of the last seven days of protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Rolling archive.

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=595819600"