Wikipedia:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))
Line 81: Line 81:


'''Temporary full protection:''' Content dispute/edit warring. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet|talk]]) 07:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
'''Temporary full protection:''' Content dispute/edit warring. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet|talk]]) 07:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

=== [[:SB19]] ===
* {{pagelinks|SB19}}
'''Indefinite semi-protection:''' Persistent Vandalism. [[User:EN-Jungwon|<font face="Brush Script MT"><span style="color:purple">EN</span></font>]]-'''''[[User talk:EN-Jungwon|<span style="color:orange">Jungwon</span>]]''''' 07:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)


== Current requests for reduction in protection level ==
== Current requests for reduction in protection level ==

Revision as of 07:42, 15 January 2021

"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 get rid of obvious vandalism.

    Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level
    Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level
    Request a specific edit to a protected page
    Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
    this header: view • edit



    Current requests for increase in protection level

    Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload 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.

    Gab (social network)

    Extended confirmed protection: This page was recently fully protected for a few days due to disruptive editing, mostly attempts to remove sourced content. Semi-protection has been reapplied for a period of three years, which I imagine should soon be sufficient, but it is not currently sufficient. Gab has been in the news due to the recent decision by Twitter/Facebook/etc. to suspend some high-profile conservatives (including Donald Trump), and due to fellow alt-tech social network Parler being taken offline by its service providers. This has become a highly-viewed page and disruption has been quite high as a result. There have also been attempts by Gab itself to

    involved with the page, I would ECP for minimum one month, under AP2 DS. GorillaWarfare (talk) 17:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Okay, so from my experience, the standard way we would approach this is to ask whether blocks are insufficient for dealing with the disruption that's occurring beyond semi. Again, from experience, if it's three or more autoconfirmed accounts causing trouble after semi has been installed, we go ECP. In that case, I would be happy to say we should go for three months of ECP. If I'm reading the history correctly, we're currently one strike away from "quorum". Another point - would this be a page we can easily put under 1RR? GorillaWarfare? Samsara 17:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps I'm a pessimist, but the fact that we've had two autoconfirmed accounts making disruptive changes in under two hours after semiprotection was applied leads me to believe trying to rely on blocks alone will be an exhausting game of whack-a-mole. If you would like to wait for a third account to begin disruption, we can; I imagine it won't take very long. However due to the high viewer numbers I would rather we prevent the disruption rather than react to it. As for 1RR, I don't know if that would help. The disruption has been coming from so many different accounts that it seems like it will be the people reverting back to status quo that will be caught in the 1RR rather than those reverting against consensus. GorillaWarfare (talk) 18:03, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, there's one account that would already have had to cease editing, or now be blocked, that's why I'm bringing it up. "Having to wait" for warnings to go unheeded does take extra time. I'll have my eye on it every few mins for the next hour or two. I'm not necessarily more optimistic than you, just more process-wonky. ;-) Samsara 18:10, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It need to consider edit warring noticeboard. I believe it should be used when a users conduct edit warring with each other.
    Gorillawarfare request is fine but edit warring noticeboard needs to be considered because there are situation where ECP who also conduct edit war. I don't want it to be full protected it again only because that. I also believe it is a content dispute that needs a precaution against them. 110.137.127.103 (talk) 18:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Looks to me it's more like some users suddenly wanting to change a long-standing consensus. It's part of Wikipedia's culture to then discuss and see whether the consensus has indeed changed. Right now, we seem to be at the stage of people just pushing words around. I don't see any substantial discussion yet. Samsara 18:25, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Rather than GorillaWarfare request, i would refer to request indefinite semi-protection for this article. IMO, semi-protection for only 3 years is ineaquate, and it is possible for it to vandalized this page again after 3 years. You see in Facebook, the article is indef semi-protection rather than only effect in years. 110.137.127.103 (talk) 18:31, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Gab (social network) is already under indef PC1. That should be sufficient for now. We can re-evaluate the need for semi in three years, or when ECP ends if it comes to that. Samsara 18:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok Samsara, IMO three year semi-protection followed by indef PC1 should be sufficient for now in order to prevent vandalism from users. I believe it should be a warning for all users where they must not intend to vandalize the page. Any user that are to vandalize the page needs to give a warning for them. Thank you. 110.137.127.103 (talk) 18:48, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough, I'll give you a ping if disruption continues (if you haven't already seen it). GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:00, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Anachronist: Just FYI. Samsara 19:53, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I was going to reply here but Samsara beat me to it.
    Extended confirmed protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The disruptive activity and edit warring have involved multiple non-EC editors and show signs of continuation. Although I have participated a bit on the talk page, I have had almost no activity in the article (looking through the history, I see myself making a minor edit and then reverting myself), so I felt my involvement was distant enough to act in an administrative capacity to preserve the stability of the article by applying the protection. I have no objection to another administrator undoing it if there is disagreement. The previous protection was 3-year semi, which may as well be indef. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:03, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. I agree that we don't necessarily need to decide between 3 years or indef semi-protection at the current moment. GorillaWarfare (talk) 22:04, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Kansas

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent

    vandalism. CLCStudent (talk) 21:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. Samsara 21:45, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Ismail al-Jazari

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Kansas Bear (talk) 00:34, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined –
    Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Michael Greiner 04:59, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    2012 (film)

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – IPs and a couple of registered editors making bizarre micro-edits. DonIago (talk) 02:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Not done Pending the open SPI case. Michael Greiner 05:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Pashtun empires and dynasties

    Semi-protection: Persistent IP disruption. HistoryofIran (talk) 04:55, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 05:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Cathy Areu

    Long-term semi-protection, please. IPs claiming to be the subject have been changing the text since at least 2019, e.g. [1]. Currently, the IPs are adding more detail about a lawsuit the subject has started against named individuals, which is causing BLP issues. SarahSV (talk) 04:55, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 05:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    CambridgeBayWeather, pending changes is a nuisance, requiring someone to check and accept or reject. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not willing to do it. What is wrong with semi-protection? SarahSV (talk) 06:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    SlimVirgin The amount of BLP on there is low but consistent. It does not reach the level required for semi. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 06:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Gender reveal party

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – A lot of garbage IP edits recently. Crossroads -talk- 06:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Pinoy pop and redirects

    Semi-protection: The article and redirects have been a target of User:Philippinesfan and a bunch of IP and sockpuppet accounts. -WayKurat (talk) 06:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Michèle_Cuvelier

    Semi-protection: The (Dutch-only) article has been subject to severe vandalism following a Belgian radio presenter demonstrating how easy it was to edit the page.

    Shlomo Carlebach (musician)

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Binksternet (talk) 07:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    SB19

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent Vandalism. EN-Jungwon 07:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    Shortcuts

    Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at 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.

    Shortcuts

    Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at 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.

    Shortcuts

    Talk:Donald Trump

    Reason: Should not have been protected, was not getting vandalized on a regular basis.2600:100C:B04A:3DB7:7D43:6C94:E4C6:BDBB (talk) 22:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Support and I will add that I requested that the admin who protected the page unprotect it themselves. 66.69.214.204 (talk) 22:57, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fuck no. Zinnober9 (talk) 23:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I see that all pretensions of civility go out the window when it comes to stifling dissent. 66.69.214.204 (talk) 23:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You seem to have a plank in your eye. —
    threads critiques 00:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Murat Ekşioğlu

    Hello. I want to edit the page more carefully and with resources. Please unprotect the page. Deryakayaer (talk) 02:27, 15 January 2021 (UTC)Deryakayaer[reply]

    • Automated comment: @
      Talk to my owner:Online 02:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
      ]

    @Cyberbot: Accidentally Protected. He is a well-known singer in Turkey. I want to add to Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murat_Ekşioğlu Deryakayaer (talk) 03:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)Deryakayaer[reply]

    Not unprotected Page isn't protected. Michael Greiner 05:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @Michael Greiner: Thank you for your answer. Could you please review it later if you create it if I develop it? English Biography: https://kimdeyir.com/who-is-murat-eksioglu-whence-biography-of-age-height-crest-sign-life Google: https://g.co/kgs/5us3G5 Do you create it? I'll contribute and you can review. Okey? Deryakayaer (talk) 06:26, 15 January 2021 (UTC)Deryakayaer[reply]

    @Michael Greiner: In the meantime, I see that it is under protection. Please check again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murat_Ekşioğlu Deryakayaer (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2021 (UTC)Deryakayaer[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests
    Shortcut

    Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.

    Shortcut

    Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.

    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests


    Brianna Wu

    please update the sources for [12] and [13].

    12: https://archive.ph/ek0sE

    13: https://web.archive.org/web/20161101205623/http://www.briannawu.net/about

    Im not afraid (talk) 04:21, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User Talk:LilianaUwU

    Please add {{subst:ANI-notice}} to this page. 66.69.214.204 (talk) 22:51, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Not done This has already been done by
    threads critiques 22:53, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Create a level 3 header with a link to the article in question, then a {{pagelinks}} template and then the reason.

    User talk:Hephaestos

    User talk:Hephaestos (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs) He last edited on July 25, 2013. Can someone update the talk page notice to say that instead of September 27, 2007?

    talk) 23:28, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]

    Handled 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=1000474787"