Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 14:59, 16 September 2008 view sourceRossrs (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers34,076 edits →{{la\|Gary Cooper}}← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:59, 16 September 2008 view source Rossrs (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers34,076 editsm →{{la\|Gary Cooper}}Next edit →
Line 25:		Line 25:
	:{{RFPP\|n}} Semi-protection is not, as a matter of ], used to deal with content disputes. The information inserted is cited, and as such it is not vandalism. ] (]) 14:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)		:{{RFPP\|n}} Semi-protection is not, as a matter of ], used to deal with content disputes. The information inserted is cited, and as such it is not vandalism. ] (]) 14:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

	::It's not a content dispute. It's a banned sock acting as an anon to avoid a ban. Content is irrelevant, and the log history shows that it has previously been protected due to identical edits and identical behavior by what can be ~~assume~~ to be the identical anon editor. ] (]) 14:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)		::It's not a content dispute. It's a banned sock acting as an anon to avoid a ban. Content is irrelevant, and the log history shows that it has previously been protected due to identical edits and identical behavior by what can be assumed to be the identical anon editor. ] (]) 14:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

	===={{la\|Jeffree Star}}====		===={{la\|Jeffree Star}}====

Revision as of 14:59, 16 September 2008

"WP:RFP" and "WP:RPP" redirect here. You may also be looking for Misplaced Pages:Requests for permissions, Misplaced Pages:Requesting copyright permission, or Misplaced Pages:Random page patrol.

v t e Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles, content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards

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.

Skip to table of contents
requests to raise protection
lower protection
requested edits
(purge)

Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level Request protection

Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level Request unprotection

Request a specific edit to a protected page
Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here Request edit

this header: view • edit

Archives

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Current requests for protection

Place requests for new or upgrading of article protection, upload protection, or create 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.

Jeremy Brett (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi Protect - was semi protected due to tendentious editing by a banned user (User:HarveyCarter) as an anon. Semi protection was lifted on Sep 14, and since then the same information has been inserted twice. Rossrs (talk) 14:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Gary Cooper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi Protect - tendentious editing by a banned user (User:HarveyCarter) as an anon. Edit history shows a constant insertion of information which several editors have quickly removed, over at least several weeks. this edit summary of Sep 1, "I don't care, I will keep adding this forever" does not suggest good-faith editing, and true to his word he has added the same information on 15 occasions since then. Rossrs (talk) 14:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Note: Semi-protection is not, as a matter of policy, used to deal with content disputes. The information inserted is cited, and as such it is not vandalism. Stifle (talk) 14:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

It's not a content dispute. It's a banned sock acting as an anon to avoid a ban. Content is irrelevant, and the log history shows that it has previously been protected due to identical edits and identical behavior by what can be assumed to be the identical anon editor. Rossrs (talk) 14:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Jeffree Star (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi Protect. My God! Look at the vandalism in the history. There is excessive vandalism by anonymous IPs. And because of Jeffree Star's lifestyle, hateful vandalizers will continue to strike. DrinkThineCookies (talk) 13:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected: One week. seicer | talk | contribs 13:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Navajo people (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. This article has been the recent target of an excessive flurry of vandalism brought on mostly by anonymous IPs. A large portion of the article was deleted without notice for nearly two weeks before an editor today restored it. LotR (talk) 12:49, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected: Two weeks. seicer | talk | contribs 13:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Template:Weather (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protect. Per Misplaced Pages:High-risk templates: "The template is used in a permanently highly visible location, that isn't cascade protected." Was declined yesterday for not enough vandalism, but that wasn't the point; I listed it as a high-risk template. If it is declined for not being high-risk, OK; but the decline didn't address that (maybe that part was overlooked). However, please do not full-protect, "After all, this is a wiki". Rgrds. --Tombstone (talk) 11:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Note: I'm just not seeing significant reason to do it. It is only on a small handfull of pages in the mainspace, and the rest is on user pages. Very little vandalism over the course of time, so I'd decline it. I'll let somebody else comment though. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:23, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Ernest Rutherford (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Remains a favorite target for IP vandals. / edg ☺ ☭ 11:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected: One month. seicer | talk | contribs 13:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Indonesia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect, lots of anonymous IP vandalism, edit war. 121.96.121.67 (talk) 09:41, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. seicer | talk | contribs 13:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Non-encyclopedic titles (vandalism)

Essentially declined - create protecting one apparently won't stop him from creating others. And, ugh, the work? :-p Xavexgoem (talk) 10:21, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Question: Wasn't there a Mediawiki page that could be used to prohibit page names by Regexp? I do see some possibility for an inteligent regexp that could prevent some of these creations.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by PaterMcFly (talk • contribs) 11:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively.: Quite frankly, he'd only circumvent this by creating more variants. We can't protect all of them... seicer | talk | contribs 13:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
You can propose a regexp addition at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. Stifle (talk) 14:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Fareham (borough) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary full-protection Edit warring. Please protect in the The wrong version --PaterMcFly (talk) 08:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'll check what's going on... hopefully they'll try talk. Xavexgoem (talk) 10:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Los Angeles, California (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, recent IP vandalism.Andrewlp1991 (talk) 03:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined, seems to have stopped. Stifle (talk) 14:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Star Wars: The Force Unleashed (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi protection Vandalism, Has in the last few days received vandal edits from several IPs; with this week's release (starting tomorrow) of major game that is part of this multimedia project, I anticipate such vandalism will only increase..--EEMIV (talk) 03:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined, vandalism seems to have stopped. Stifle (talk) 14:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

List of songs in Guitar Hero World Tour (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect Heavy IP vandalism has resumed since three-day protection expired. Both this and the main article attract constant vandalism. Please protect for a longer period of time, because it will be attacked as soon as protection expires. Dmwiki (talk) 01:07, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Stifle (talk) 14:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

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

Semi-protect. Target of Grawp socks. Bart133 02:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Done by Alison. Thanks. -- zzuuzz 09:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Dragon Ball: Yo! Son Goku and His Friends Return!! (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism both registered and unregistered IP's. Sarujo (talk) 05:53, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Stifle (talk) 14:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

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.

Template:ArticleHistory (edit | ] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporarily semi-protect Few editors are requesting to make improvements and necessary changes to the template, mainly to enhance the template's functionality. See talk. --Must eat worms (talk) 03:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Unprotected, please request reprotection here when done. Consider using a template sandbox in future to request changes so that an admin can just copy-paste the work into the template. Stifle (talk) 14:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Lehman Brothers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Article is on the main page. There has been some vandalism, however, not persistent and not at a level that should warrant any kind of protection. Article was recently semi-protected, and I request that it be fully unprotected, and if vandalism becomes unmanagable, protection should be considered only then. __meco (talk) 14:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Miley Cyrus (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Okay, does anyone on Misplaced Pages have any connection with the entertainment media? Because it sounds like there is. I think that the reason someone put a protection on the Miley Cyrus discussion page is because I posted a link to an article that could prove that it wasn't Miley in those racy internet photos. The people in the entertainment media want to be able to pick on her for those pictures and if it gets out that the photos are fake, they won't be able to use it against her without looking stupid. There is something going on here. And you people need to realize that. 72.95.139.248 (talk) 21:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

From what I can see, it doesn't appear to be related to your posts. The protection of the talk page was a result of excessive rumor-mongering that was taking place, primarilly on September 6th, in violation of BLP. Here's the request reason that had been given: "Under siege by vandals. False death rumors inserted in BLP. Multiple editors, multiple IPs ... it's just gone out of control in the last hour." --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

If people keep constantly vandalizing the Miley Cyrus talk page, just ban them. It takes a lot of work, but it's simple weeding out the vandals. You get rid of them and keep the good ones, and everything is back to normal. Even though you don't want us to mess with the article itself, the talk page works so that you can listen to peoples suggestions and if you like them you can put it on the article. How am I supposed to put my suggestions on the talk page? 72.95.139.248 (talk) 22:10, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

We can't ban users just because they're being disruptive on a talk page, unless they're egregriously violating BLP. Further, we can't ban IPs; we can only block them for a short time and even then they'll just come back under a different IP (at least the dynamic and open-proxy ones will). Thus, if IPs are egregriously violating BLP on a talk page, protection is better than playing whac-a-mole because IPs change hands quite often. -Jéské 07:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Contrary to admin claim; no sign of edit warring. There was only one editor and instead, admin confused two bot reverts with edit war, and another editor rv due to one blank edit message out of several legitimate edits. No AGF, admin refuses to unprotect. --Shuki (talk) 22:33, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Not unprotected, please gather a consensus on the talk page or wait for the protection to expire on Friday. Stifle (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

United States presidential election, 2008 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This page has been protected for a very long time, and I didn't think the point of Misplaced Pages was to protect every page that "someone from the outside could possibly edit." I think it should be unprotected, at least for a while, because we really haven't seen it when it is not protected. And I don't think we have seen any "excessive vandalism" that would warrant a protection. Plus, it is a highly visited page by users, so vandalism would likely be removed swiftly by the abundance of users editing the page. Ocexpo (talk) 03:41, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Done Since the reason for the semi-protection was "edit warring", I've removed it. Hopefully 8 months was long enough. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Vietnam War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Could someone pls unprotect the Vietnam War Page? The Infobox (on the Capitalist side) is incomplete. I need to add Spain, Nicaragua, and Paraguay is missing in the Capitalist side of the infobox. So even if it can not be unprotected could someone who is authorised to edit a semi protected page pls add Spain, Nicaragua and Paraguay to the list. Tnx.

Unprotected Stifle (talk) 14:49, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Current requests for edits to a protected page

Shortcut

WP:RFED

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 Misplaced Pages:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{Edit COI}} template should be used.
Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Misplaced Pages: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

Beijing 2008 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I request that the Beijing 2008 protection to be lifted because there is many information that I can proudly donate to the page but because of the block I can't. So please try to lift the block. 24.1.4.241 (talk) 23:52, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined - page is a redirect. You want 2008 Summer Olympics, which is also

Declined due to what appears to be a brewing conflict.-Jéské 07:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Tanya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Much recent IP vandalism, no credible edits. JNW (talk) 04:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined - seems to be possible to deal with this by blocking a couple of IPs (some were blocked, some stopped after warning). Kusma (talk) 06:27, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

IPhone OS version history (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary full protection Vandalism, Unresonable edit removing.Mojtaba Cazi (talk) 20:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Objection: Mojtaba Cazi has actually violated the 3RR rule trying to put his blog links in the article. He has been warned about his edits multiple times by different editors today. There's no reason to protect this page. -- Atama 21:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined Concur...it's a single editor 3RRing vs others' claims that it is against WP:EL...treat as a user-issue. DMacks (talk) 07:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Template:SarahPalinSegmentsUnderInfoBox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Remove protection of this template. The number of people editing Sarah Palin-related pages has now dropped considerably; and, with this template's remaining protected, current requests for administrators to update its content are being ignored. $\sim$ Justmeherenow ( ) 13:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined template has been updated & remains a high profile target. SkierRMH (talk) 06:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Atom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection Vandalism, continuous IP vandalism since the start of the 08-09 school year. Check other science/academic topic articles too for such similar patterns of vandalism; I've noticed that for American Revolution and British Empire, for example.Andrewlp1991 (talk) 03:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Weird balance between "they never learn", and "they learn, move on, and then new unlearned masses take their place":( DMacks (talk) 04:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Happiness (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Quite a lot of vandalism, perhaps from the same person. At anyrate, its being vandalized. And it's making me unhappy.. Marlith (Talk) 03:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. If you find yourself getting saddened when it expires, let us know! DMacks (talk) 04:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Evan Thomas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

page frequently vandalized to add private/inaccurate information to biography of living person. This has been going on for a full year. Protection request in January stopped vandalism until a few weeks ago, when user reposted vandalism using new wording.

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. DMacks (talk) 04:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Wasilla, Alaska (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection Vandalism.Kelly 03:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I can only see one offending user, who has been blocked by another admin. Is semi still needed?--Tznkai (talk) 03:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like problem taken care of - the IP who was making the same edit was probably the same person. Go ahead and close this one, thanks. Kelly 03:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

User(s) blocked.--Tznkai (talk) 04:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Kat DeLuna (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. Heavy IP vandalism. Enviroboy_Cs 00:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Húsönd 00:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Jackie Chan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Page keeps getting vandalized by many IP users.Techman224 (talk) 00:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Húsönd 00:41, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

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

full protection User talk of blocked user, blocked user is vandalising templates on user page, e.g. changing unblock declined to accepted and adding nonsense.--Snigbrook 00:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Already protected. by Tiptoety. Húsönd 00:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Chinese Civil War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary Full-Protection : Edit warring: I added in the talk page as well as a html comment inviting the anonymous IP user for a discussion. This invitation was ignored, and he/she proceeded to reinsert the highly disputed POV without commenting, as what he/she has been persistently doing during the last week or so. This user uses different IP addresses for his/her edits so I am not sure if blocking would work--pyl (talk) 13:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Fully protected--Húsönd 00:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

User talk:202.45.119.130 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

temporary semi protection User talk of blocked user, Blocked IP is adding nonsense/vandalism to talk page.--Snigbrook 23:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected--Húsönd 23:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Pakistan-administered Kashmir (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary full protection Dispute, There is an active dispute going on over this page. I have been providing WP:3O but that has failed, I am leaving the discussion but have advised that editwars should stop and that discussion should be an WP:RFC or else WP:MEDCOM if all agree. I am also MEDCAB member and prob not a good candidate for us, but other members might disagree. This stems from dispute in POV and also from this AfD. Decline if you disagree :-) .Fr33kman 22:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined One of the warring users has tagged the article for POV instead of reverting his opponent's last edit, signaling a possible cease-fire. Please request full protection again if the war proceeds. Húsönd 23:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Final Fantasy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect Been getting a lot vandalism. Repku (talk) 22:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined Current level of vandalism does not justify protection. Besides, one of the only two recent vandals is already blocked. Húsönd 23:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:59, 16 September 2008 view sourceRossrs (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers34,076 edits →{{la\|Gary Cooper}}← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:59, 16 September 2008 view source Rossrs (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers34,076 editsm →{{la\|Gary Cooper}}Next edit →
Line 25:		Line 25:
	:{{RFPP\|n}} Semi-protection is not, as a matter of ], used to deal with content disputes. The information inserted is cited, and as such it is not vandalism. ] (]) 14:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)		:{{RFPP\|n}} Semi-protection is not, as a matter of ], used to deal with content disputes. The information inserted is cited, and as such it is not vandalism. ] (]) 14:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

	::It's not a content dispute. It's a banned sock acting as an anon to avoid a ban. Content is irrelevant, and the log history shows that it has previously been protected due to identical edits and identical behavior by what can be ~~assume~~ to be the identical anon editor. ] (]) 14:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)		::It's not a content dispute. It's a banned sock acting as an anon to avoid a ban. Content is irrelevant, and the log history shows that it has previously been protected due to identical edits and identical behavior by what can be assumed to be the identical anon editor. ] (]) 14:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

	===={{la\|Jeffree Star}}====		===={{la\|Jeffree Star}}====