Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:14, 16 February 2009

Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.

Shortcuts WP:RFPP WP:RFP WP:RPP 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

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.

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

Temporary semi-protection - frequent vandalism by IP Users Request was removed by the IP vandal. See

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=271098258&oldid=271097930

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=271097646&oldid=271096531 --pyl (talk) 11:15, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Rangers F.C. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Perennial anon vandalism multiple times a day. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I do nto get why this or the celtic page gets unproctected it will alwasy get vandlised by fans of the oppiste team these shoudl remain semi proctected forever. how many times has this article been proctect and unprocteect? and not long after needs reproctected--Andrewcrawford (talk) 12:40, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection - Article was recently unprotected and almost immediately became the subject of frequent vandalism. I suggest long-term (but not indefinite) semi-protection. – PeeJay 09:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Kanonkas :  Talk  10:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Persistent IP-vandalism, and not much else going on. Let's semi-protect it while it's featured - I've noticed that this often gets done on featured articles while they're on the main page anyway. -Lilac Soul 07:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined - we very rarely protect the FA. —Anonymous Dissident 09:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

You know, I actually thought that was the case myself, but I had noticed lately that a number of FAs were semi-protected, so I thought perhaps I was wrong, or that policy had changed. But thanks for the reply! -Lilac Soul 09:26, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Word76 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite full protection user talk of blocked user, Blocked user is using his talk page as a "toy". User is an indef blocked sock of User:Dingbat2007. NeutralHomer • Talk • February 16, 2009 @ 02:14 02:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

• User(s) blocked.; I just re-blocked and disallowed the user to edit the talk page. (Note: tell me if it doesn't work; this is my first time using that block setting). Heimstern Läufer (talk) 12:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2009 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary full protection dispute, User:Chelo61 is adding roster lists to mentioned article. Per consensus at WT:VG and WP:GAMECRUFT, roster lists should not be added. protection is needed, and a block for said user would be nice. Thank you. Simon 19:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Anyone? Simon 01:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Current requests for unprotection

• WP:RFUP
• WP:RFPU

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.

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

The page has an indefinite protection; however the current version is left with empty citations and nobody can add content. Please review the protection for this page.

Note: please contact Kevin (talk · contribs), the protecting admin. –Juliancolton 01:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Current requests for edits to a protected page

• 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

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

full protection; high level of vandalism IP and new users the last couple of weeks, especially the last couple of days.

Out of 43 possible edits, 16 times Since 13 January 2009:

TIMES VANDALISIZED:

1. -21:26, 13 January 2009 71.41.175.6
2. -23:55, 16 January 2009 76.125.65.12
3. -02:11, 19 January 2009 JeffersonDavies
4. -23:19, 24 January 2009 69.228.207.205
5. -02:08, 27 January 2009 173.28.92.52
6. -02:09, 27 January 2009 173.28.92.52
7. -20:28, 2 February 2009 96.57.96.250
8. -20:29, 2 February 2009 96.57.96.250
9. -20:30, 2 February 2009 96.57.96.250
10. -01:39, 3 February 2009 69.119.42.56
11. -12:58, 8 February 2009 132.3.1.68 Racial Remark
12. -21:50, 12 February 2009 169.204.230.190
13. -19:14, 13 February 2009 71.113.165.21
14. -14:42, 14 February 2009 69.148.205.53
15. -21:37, 14 February 2009 69.141.138.66
16. -22:59, 14 February 2009 153.25.52.60

If you include adding the link (which I would like to):

• www.nbadraftdepot.com/

1. -02:10, 19 January 2009 JeffersonDavies
2. -20:23, 28 January 2009 173.19.252.129
3. -03:30, 16 February 2009 RodneyWhite

Three more times, for 19 out of 43.

Because of Griffin's increasing notoriety, considered the best college basketball player in college and #1 NBA prospect, I see the vandalism to this article only ramping up over time. So, I would like to see indefinite full-protection. Also, because of his mixed race, there maybe some racial slurs, as there was in one edit above. At the very least until after the end of the college basketball season, or April 15.

> Best O Fortuna (talk) 06:34, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton 06:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Francis of Assisi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection; high level of vandalism IP and new users the last couple of weeks, especially the last couple of days. mwalimu59 (talk) 04:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton 05:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Blink-182 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, High level of IP vandalism. Needs at least week-long protection to allow all the fans to calm down. Timmeh! 04:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton 05:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, IP vandalism now that tonight's Pay Per View is over. a few hours of protection should be enough. . Frehley 04:15, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton 05:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Largoplazo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite semi-protection vandalism, Some user using various IPs has started sticking db-spam templates repeatedly on my page. Since there isn't any reason for IP users to be modifying my user page anyway, can I get permanent semiprotection?. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. –Juliancolton 03:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

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

Semi-protect, for as long as the reviewing admin is willing to grant, preferably indefinitely. Eleven incidents (taking multiple consecutive edits as a single incident) of anonymous vandalism in the last two weeks, and only one productive anonymous contribution in the same period. See This is an ongoing problem, as the page history demonstrates (see also (Feb. 5) (anonymous user blocked for vandalizing this page and their talk page protected); (Feb. 4) (previous request; page protection refused when there were only six incidents in one week)).

Page protection has recently been granted for non-WP:BLP articles after fewer incidents over the same period of time, e.g. (five incidents of anonymous vandalism over same period); (eight incidents of anonymous vandalism over the same period). If five or eight incidents was enough to protect articles about television shows, surely, given the concerns of WP:BLP, eleven incidents over the same period is a fortiori enough to merit protection of a BLP. (I reiterate my strong support for the proposal to semi-protect all BLPs, permanently, also.) - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 21:03, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined While I understand the concern, this seems like an overreaction. First, the article in question has never been protected before, ever. Second, protection is reserved for articles that have a lot of vandalism in a short amount of time. If an article was vandalized just once a day for an entire year I would not consider that to qualify for protection either since it can be easily reverted. It would be like using a sludge hammer to kill a fruit fly. -Royalguard11(T) 02:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

With respect, I believe this is an inadequate response. As I pointed out in the request, protection has been granted this weekend for other articles that have had less vandalism and which lack the heightened concerns of BLP. (If this was an article about you, and your picture was repeatedly being replaced by a picture of a woman performing fellatio, I find it hard to believe you would be so blasé.) Nor can I fathom the argument that the article not having been protected before is a reason not to protect it now. I must politely request reconsideration. - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 02:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

What is more, Not ten minutes after you declined this request for page protection, you agreed to protect PacMan for a week after twelve incidents of anonymous vandalism in the last two weeks. See (Feb. 16 02:11). Twelve incidents is good enough reason to protect the article about an 80s video game, but eleven incidents in the same time span is not enough to protect a BLP? Really? - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 03:34, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection Lots of IP vandalism. If it's set for a week hopefully the vandal will find another article to target. Betty Logan (talk) 01:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton 01:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

No Way Out (2009) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection Lots of IP vandalism. Should stop after tonights event is over. TJ Spyke 01:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton 01:21, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

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

Full protection for a while, until the editors realize they need to reach consensus on the talk page first, then edit. Thanks. --KP Botany (talk) 00:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection, repeated vandalism from non-registered users. (Justinsane15 (talk) 00:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)).

Declined, Page has only existed for 2 days, <50 total edits. -Royalguard11(T) 01:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Cape Cod Community College (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Requesting Semi-protect. Users with IP addresses from Boston keep adding 'Harvard of the Middle Cape' as a nickname for this institution, yet refuse to cite. Adding a 'citation needed' tag and entries in the discussion page hasn't helped. Forcing registration to change the page is the next logical step.

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -Royalguard11(T) 01:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Daytona 500 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Persistent vandalism on article following the conclusion of the race. MuZemike 23:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton 01:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Jack Thompson (attorney) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Please semi; repeated vandalism by mulitple IPs on a BLP Aunt Entropy (talk) 23:44, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton 01:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

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

Needs semi-protection. Its come under repeated assualt by IPs, as visible by checking the history. ResMar 00:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -Royalguard11(T) 02:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Katich 23 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite full protection user talk of blocked user. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 00:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. I've adjusted the block to disallow him editing his page. --Moonriddengirl 00:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC)