Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:48, 13 July 2006

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.

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

Un protection There is no need for any move protection because the issue has been resolved with all parties agreeing to the title of Portal:Taiwan Island instead of Portal:Taiwan. -Chiang Kai-shek 07:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Surely you mean Portal:Taiwan? Zetawoof 08:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Full protection This user has apparantly misused {{unblock}} to (slanderously) attack Kungfuadam (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). I also suggest that if a Burocart get to protect it, they could try the OrthodoxWiki solution of changing the username to a vandalnumber.:-( Myrtone03:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Indefinite protection or semi-protection - as one can see by very recent activity, the page is under assualt. It has been continually coming up on my VandalProof screen and I decided to bring this matter here. Thanks! -- moe.RON 03:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Full protection The Habbo Hotel service is under a rampant attack by a large group of users. Habbo Hotel's article is also being vandalized faster than in can be repaired. Arx Fortis 03:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Full protection There has been a heated edit and revert war over the past several days. Several editors have suggested protecting the article to enforce a cool-down period while an RFC can be written and filed to attempt to resolve the situation. --ElKevbo 02:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Full protection: Jeff_Relf (talk · contribs) has been continually adding his own original research to the "Scientific Philosophy" section of the article - discussions on the article and his edits are on the Discuss page. The user will not budge from his own incorrect view of modern physics and has now moved onto editing the Classical Physics page to try and further his own agenda. Desdinova 02:19, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I've blocked the user per 3RR.Voice-of-All 09:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

The user is now trying to introduce the changes he was originally chastised for (pseudorandomness, a position he has no supporting evidence for), in a new section of the same article.

He was asked to put his changes first on the talk page. Rather then that, he did both (i.e. added them to the Talk page at the same time he added it to Albert_Einstein page).

Desdinova 13:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I've just noticed he has attempted to redo his edits to Classical Physics as well.

Desdinova 16:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi protection: Anonymous user has been waging a slow revert war. Several attempts to get him to participate in a discussion on Talk:Jerome Armstrong have been met with stony silence. Same person has also twice vandalised user pages of people he disagrees with, indicating that he has no interest in consensus-building. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri @ 20:23, July 8, 2006

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Voice-of-All 08:54, 9 July 2006 (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.

Template:Sprotect-banneduser(edit talk links history)

Downgrade to semi, no reason for this to be fully protected, it isn't a HRT and it being a semi-protection template it only needs to be semi-protected (so non-autoconfirmed users cannot vandalize it to vandalize articles). Kotepho 01:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

There are plenty of other football team pages that get vandalised far more often yet this is the only one to have protection. Vandals are all IPs that could easily be banned. SenorKristobbal 20:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Its still to soon to un-protect since the wave of vandalism will likely continue immediately after un-protection. There are to many unique IP addresses. Voice-of-All 00:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

I think it's been semi-protected for long enough. BhaiSaab 18:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Un-protected. Its been protected for long enough. Hopefully things have calmed down since then. Voice-of-All 00:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Current requests for significant 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.

Fullfilled/denied requests

Republic of China (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection Starting on July 5, this article as well as several other Taiwan and China related articles have been the target of persistant POV pushing instigated by an anon operating mostly from the 167.7.39.* IP range. Repeated requests were made to the anon to discuss the issue rather then engaging in repeated reversions, however all requests have been ignored by the editor who continues to make several attempts every day. The situation has escalated to the point where the edit warring has become disruptive. I am requesting semi protection in hopes that this will prompt the anon to engage in dialouge instead of continuously reverting. -Loren 23:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I have blocked the anon for violation of WP:3RR. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I have checked the blocklog and there seem to be no mathcing items, why? Myrtone02:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection Yesterday there was a vandal(I.P.) that kept on vandalsing the article so it said somthing about the dinosaur not existing because there not in the bible. He did multiple times before he was blocked. I think it should be locked for few days(maybe weeks) since I.P.'s can change and if he did multiple times he'll probally do it again.--Scott3 21:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Just a comment, most of the edits in question seem to originate from 195.93.21.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). While the IP is registered to AOL, I find it interesting that it remained constant throughout all the edits. Perhaps blocking that single IP might be a better idea until he/she comes back under a different IP. -Loren 23:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Unless the vandal returns under another IP address, I don't think this requires protection. Watchlist and revert as necessary. Zetawoof 00:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

He has a AOL account and he has used multpile account(atleast 2 maybe more) and he did vandalise dinosaurs with another account. Also he keeps on doing it I think this does require temporay semi-protection for a few days.--Scott3 03:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Brighton & Hove Albion F.C. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection Crystal Palace, Brighton and Portsmouth "fans" have been repeatedly vandalising each others wikipedia entries. The vandalism has been planned on web forums for the clubs. Wjousts 19:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. It seems to have slowed down.Voice-of-All 00:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Full-protection Anonymous users (who may be the same person, as it is usually a Comcast IP address) continually change biographical details without explanation, even when repeatedly asked for a source for their changes.--Fallout boy 17:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. For now, be sure to use descriptive edit summaries and discuss edits on talk. Voice-of-All 00:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection There is one anonymous user with a different IP every day who is in dispute with all other editors and is accumulating changes which represent information which is repeated, irrelevant or incorrect. This individual refuses to enter into debate on the talk page and simply undoes the work of other editors. --Bcnviajero 17:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Voice-of-All 00:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection anonymous users frequently add alot of cruft (such as their house rules), shoutouts to individual people, and just random crap. It has been going on for a long while, as since it is associated with drinking cultyre it is a frequent target. Furthermore the article is listed as a good article and myself and several others are trying to improve it to FA; which will be more difficult without semi-protection --larsinio (poke) 14:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Seems to have slowed down.Voice-of-All 00:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Full protection requested due to a revert war involving several users and an indef blocked user evading blocks through sockpuppets. Cowman109 23:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Voice-of-All 00:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection anonymous user has reverted and has threatened to keep reverting page back to his POVish version including deletion of multiple citation requests and 19 actual citations ad infenitum. Also states he will find other IPs if his is blocked. Quote from anon user: "I will delete this the first thing every morning for the rest of my life, if need be". and "If you block this IP, I will find others." Also a lot of drive by trash and few registered users: makes it hard for the editors to keep up with the changes. --Cylon 13:10, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

There clearly is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Voice-of-All 00:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:Afc top (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Full Protection, users keep making major edits without any kind of discussion and is causing WP:AfC to become messy and confusing.--Andeh 20:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. For now, be sure to use descriptive edit summaries and discuss edits on talk. Voice-of-All 00:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Gregory Lauder Frost (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Having had a thorough discussion on the legality of this article on the talk page I believe a consensus has been reached and that unprotection is now the natural next step--Edchilvers 17:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The reasonable issues that started the revert war do not yet seem to have been resolved. It is also too soon to assume that the editors have lost enough interest. Consider adding {{Editprotected}} to the page's talk page to request small modifications, or making a significant edit request on this page for large edits that are agreed upon. Voice-of-All 01:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

"Consensus" on fundamental legal issues sounds like French Revolutionary-style mob rule to me. I suggest the matter is fully decided upon by Misplaced Pages's legal team only. Chelsea Tory 09:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

It's obvious that listing those in charge and involved at a radio station is standard practice on Misplaced Pages articles. This page should be unprotected and should remain in its current form Lasallefan 04:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Un-protected. Nevermind, there seems to have been little activity in the first place. Voice-of-All 00:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection Crystal Palace, Brighton and Portsmouth "fans" have been repeatedly vandalising each others wikipedia entries. The vandalism has been planned on web forums for the clubs. Wjousts 19:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Block users who vandalise it. This is far from out of hand SenorKristobbal 20:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

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

I would like the unprotection of my userpage as a sign of trust. Also, it appears the user whom was determined to vandalised the page has ceased such actions. Yanksox 16:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Un-protected. Voice-of-All 18:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Mail-order bride (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Looks like the edit war has settled down. One participant appears to have left after an RFC. Others seem ready to move forward. William Pietri 03:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Un-protected. Its been protected for long enough. Hopefully things have calmed down since then. Voice-of-All 03:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

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

Due to ongoing sabotage and vandalism by anonymous editors, I request that this article be semi-protected.Editorius 16:15, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It is currently protected.--Andeh 13:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)