Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:57, 9 September 2007

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

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.

Greatest Hits (Spice Girls album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection There is a constant stream of ongoing edits by IPs to add a rumored tracklisting without any citations to back up their claims. Attempts to bring the discussion to the talk page have failed. Request protection until the album is released.-MBK004 18:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Refractory period (sex) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

full protection Full protection: Dispute.Oxymoron 17:50, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I've temporarily protected this. Tom Harrison 17:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Why protect it at all? It's not really a dispute among reasonable people. It's just 2 bonehead editors (and a sock puppet) reverting each other dozens of times without so much as an edit summary, let alone a talk page discussion. Just keep those 2 blocked, and the problem goes away.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 18:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Protection seems like a good idea to me. Change it if you want to. Tom Harrison 18:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Change what? I can't unprotect pages. I was merely suggesting that an admin keep an eye on the two editors (once their block expires), not the article itself.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 18:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Already protected. I agree with the protection, there's disruption going on in the article, it should be protected. Mr.Z-man 18:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

The only disruptors are both blocked. I'd say the resolution lies in blocking the individuals, not in fully protecting the article. Semi-protection makes sense (so the blocked parties won't edit under new accounts or IPs), but I thought full protection is for cases where we'd like to force two or more warring editors to hash out their differences and achive a consensus on the talk page; that's not going to happen here.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 18:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection There are a lot of IPs and new users removing the maintenance tags on this article. I would semi this myself but it may be perceived as me locking an article I'm in a dispute over since I've been fairly active in restoring these tags and some of the anonymous/new users feel that this is a content dispute over the tags, not just me and others reverting vandalism. Metros 17:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the above, Yes it indeed appears that Metros/Risker are losing their neutrality. It's the ethical and legal obligation of all Misplaced Pages users to apply their editor/administrator/bureaucrat powers with complete neutrality. The objective is articles that represent fair, and verifiable information. The article under discussion contains several third party references. Metros/Risker seem intent on loading additional tags in retaliation. The Misplaced Pages community has the obligation to use its resources fairly and with neutrality. User:Brcdck 17:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Full protection - the SPAs now have sufficient edits that they could continue this edit war. There have been no additional tags used. In fact, User:Brcdck has violated WP:3RR to keep his preferred version on the page. Risker 18:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Request: kindly disable Metros and Risker from their activities with this page. There is no neutrality, and not a serious attempt to resolve the issue through the Discussion page, per Misplaced Pages policy. User:Brcdck 18:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. 72h to stop edit war. Signature 18:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

User talk:72.160.86.79 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

semi-protection Semi-protection: User talk of banned user, User is adding nasty comments to his talk page after being blocked. .Gscshoyru 16:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

• Already protected. by Alison. Acalamari 18:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Semi protect Banned user Serafin is edit warring again. When his normal IP's of the 131.104.er range are blocked (this edit and his language show quickly that this is his range), he usually resorted to more exotic IP's, so just blocking the IP won't be effective. Sciurinæ 15:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Signature 18:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Styrofoam1994 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

fully protect User Rws killer is constantly vandalising my user page and making it appear as though it is blocked.

UST Growling Tigers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. An anon (variable IPs) keeps on adding "powerful" to the section named "2006-07 starting lineup". --Howard the Duck 15:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection; over the past month (and further back) a high proportion of anonymous IP edits have either been blanking the page or writting silly comments. Further, registered users' edits are simply reverts. AlexD 13:08, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Declined Ryan Postlethwaite 13:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Could you give a reason please especially as out of the past 100 edits 41 have been reverts thus a minimum of a further 41 have been vandalism resulting in a minimum of 82 out of the past 100 edits being either vadalism or reverts. AlexD 14:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

It's a pretty high-profile page, and the vandalism isn't really out of control - the vandalism-to-reversion time lapse is pretty short - I support Ryan's decision. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism, and report again if it gets really out of hand. ~ Riana ⁂ 14:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah sorry, I thought I had done but obviously not. Basically we protect pages as a protective measure for the encyclopedia, this page, although it's been persistant over time, it hasn't been seriously hit (e.g. many many vandalisms in one day). with this being such a high profile page, the level is that to be expected. It's best we keep as many pages open to edit as possible. Ryan Postlethwaite 14:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protection Repeated addition of unsourced BLP violation by anons. Page has a history of vandalism. — iridescent (talk to me!) 12:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 4 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ~ Riana ⁂ 13:21, 9 September 2007 (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:Like Minded Group (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Protected as "high risk" but only 4 articles actually use it. There really is no reason this should be protected. --CapitalR 18:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:International power (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Protected in May from edit warring; no discussion or edits since. I would like to make some changes to it now unrelated to the edit war. --CapitalR 18:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Protected because it was a "high risk" template. Less than 100 pages actually use this template, which doesn't make it all that high risk. It has no history of vandalism before it was protected that I can tell. --CapitalR 18:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Protected four months ago due to edit-warring. Melsaran (talk) 17:50, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

September 11, 2001 attacks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Discussion has been exhaustive and complete. No vandalism occurring. Mr.grantevans2 16:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

With the anniversary being next week it might be a good idea to leave it protected until next Friday. --PTR 18:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

All vandilism has stopped. It wasnt even vandilism because all the stuff they were adding wasnt true and I was adding what i saw on the news and also cited it. remove from semi protection. 76.16.109.18 13:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Already unprotected. - got the right article there? ~ Riana ⁂ 13:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

remove from semi protection. Its been protected for too long and there has been no more vandalism. 76.16.109.18 12:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected ~ Riana ⁂ 13:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Disappearance of Madeleine McCann (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Remove semi-protection. The reasons given by Admin TerriersFan for semi-protection are not valid reasons according to Misplaced Pages semi-protection policy. He is excluding IPs simply because the article is high profile with a large number of edits. 86.31.158.130 10:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Declined - at present there is too much scope for serious BLP issues if this article is unprotected. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:49, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Well this is not the biography of a living person it's a current event. So fine, let terriersfan and his mates carry on regardless, editing the article as though it were their personal property - we can't allow anonymous IPs to get in the way! This is just the reason why I left Misplaced Pages as a registered user some time ago; there are far too many admins like TerriersFan who use their position to control content. Please show me where, in any Wiki policy document, there is provision for restricting editing in this manner? Here is a summary of the semi-protection policy;

<snip>

I don't see anything here to justify the semi-protection. TerriersFan is simply "locking out anonymous users". 86.31.158.130 11:49, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I agree with Ryan P and TerriersFan. Daniel 12:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

You might agree with them, but as I requested earlier, please show me the policy on which you and others are making your decision. Admin decisions should generally be based on Misplaced Pages policy. 86.31.158.130 12:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

The relevant policy is WP:BLP#Semi-protection_and_protection. Specifically: who have reason to believe that this policy may otherwise be violated, may protect or semi-protect the page CIreland 12:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm not going to loose any sleep over this, but I suggest you examine closely the IP edits that seem to have caused TerriersFan to semi-protect this article. They are for the most part good faith edits. One or two have been incorrectly sourced, others have been correctly sourced but nevertheless reverted by TerriersFan and others. There was clearly no major problem with the editing of this article at the time of semi-protection. TerriersFan is simply "reserving" this article so that it reads the way he wants it to read. So far as I can see, the edits in question do not relate to BLP. There are many high-profile current event articles on Misplaced Pages and so far as I know it is not policy to semi-protect them as a pre-emptive measure. It is obvious that this article has been semi-protected to lock out anonymous IPs and as a pre-emptive measure against edits that TerriersFan doesn't personally agree with. Please look at this case in more detail. I would strongly suggest a temporary un-protection and let's just see what happens. TerriersFan and others seem to be continuously monitoring the article so they should pick up any real problems immediately. 86.31.158.130 13:43, 9 September 2007 (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.

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

I've been doing some major overhauling to the template, which was cut/pasted from a prototype on my user space to the template article. Unfortunately, there are still some minor bugs that need to be resolved, and it's difficult for me to get admins to make my requested changes. I'd like to request a temporary downgrade to semi-protection for one week in order to allow me to implement needed edits. Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola 22:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected - just re-request here or contact me directly and I'll move it back up to full protection. Thanks for your work on the template. - Philippe | Talk 22:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Godzilla: Unleashed (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

An editor seems to have flown in to remove sourced content without explanation right before the article was protected. This was unrelated to the edit war that got it protected in the first place. The edits started right here. 21:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Would someone please to restore the content? Just64helpin 23:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Done WjBscribe 01:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

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

Just what the hell is going on here? Why is this page protected from recreation? This is a damn good redirect to List of Pokémon Anime Films, but I can't do anything about this since the page is protected from recreation, yet I see nothing in the log. TheBlazikenMaster 10:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected - I think that's a very valid point, especially given the page has actually never been created. If it becomes a problem later, we can deal with it in other ways - Alison ☺ 12:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and created that redirect.--Chaser - T 17:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Immigration to Australia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I am attempting to add useful and accurate information to this page, including links to relevant legislation and comparisons to other jurisdictions. I request that the entry be reverted to my last edit, or some reasonable variation. jbdelaporte 23:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Declined - we're not going to revert to a previous version, which would have us taking part in an edit war. You may use the {{editprotected}} tag on the article talk page, with your suggested changes, and we can evaluate whether to make those changes on your behalf. - Philippe | Talk 23:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I find this very confusing. I thought the instructions were to only use the tag for a minor edit.jbdelaporte 00:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

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

At Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR‎ I asked for a large number of reversions in content disputes by the user Francis Tyers. The article were protected by all the Wiki users in last variant reverted by Francis Tyers. Some parts of reverts even arent explained in the talk page! For example he never explains why he readded "large number" term, deleted <fact> tag despite no citations from the HRW and Memorial Human Rights Center provided etc (he tried to explain only why he deleted some links which he marks as "hysteric"). I request that the entry be reverted to the last edit by Pocopocopocopoco or some reasonable variation. Andranikpasha 10:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Declined, Should discuss this on the article talk page. Navou 13:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fulfilled/denied requests

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

semi-protect. A certain anon (variable IPs) insists on adding content but there is no consensus to add it at the talk page. --Howard the Duck 11:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - I see a content dispute here. Please try and resolve it over this 7 day period. -- Anonymous Dissident 11:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

That'll be fine for me. --Howard the Duck 11:49, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protection Multiple IPs and new users engaged in internet forum inspired vandalism. CIreland 10:46, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

1 vs. 100 (Philippine game show) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Section kept being split despite a hidden warning. Request originally by Dehm46 05:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC), but was placed in the article itself instead by accident; placed here as unsolicited favor because of equal concerns. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 07:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

unprotection +expiry 2 weeks, Unprotection.DogGunn 06:34, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Declined Ryan Postlethwaite 10:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Protect - Multiple IPs and SPAs removing MOS/notability templates on page placed by longterm editors, serious question of COI. SPAs are making minor edits elsewhere before coming to this article, so semiprotection may not be sufficient. Risker 06:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ryan Postlethwaite 10:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Savio High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism from current/former students of school. Every IP edit (and indeed every edit besides a revert) this month has been vandalism. Seems to have got worse just from the start of this month. Request for 2 weeks. Bungle 09:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Anonymous Dissident 10:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protection +expiry 2 weeks, Deliberate BLP violations by anon from multiple IPs.→ AA — 08:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ~ Riana ⁂ 08:29, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. It's a school site, so it attracts anonymous vandalism from current and former students. WarrenA 08:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ~ Riana ⁂ 08:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protection Same story as my below two requests. east.718 04:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --D_arkF_alls 05:15, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Seung-Hui Cho (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Frequent vandalism is recent days. --Strothra 04:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 9 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Anonymous Dissident 05:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. Steady stream of unconstructive IP edits. Gimmetrow 04:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - mostly one IP, but others have chimed in too, earlier on. -- Anonymous Dissident 05:08, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Cheikh Anta Diop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protect Due to edit war over inclusion of sources that needs to be worked out on talk page. --Strothra 04:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Navou 05:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

UFC 75 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection Flood of unconstructive IP edits; related to Michael Bisping's RPP below.east.718 04:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected Navou 05:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Nuttycoconut 03:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

This article is still under heavy attack.  east.718 at 04:32, September 9, 2007 

Semi-protected Navou 05:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC): Note: Already protected. Navou 05:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

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

Unprotect. Has been fully protected for over 2 weeks. This is a long enough cooldown period for an edit war. Eric Sandholm 19:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected -- Hopefully, the edit wars will have cooled off. If it starts up again as heated as it wars, reprotection should probably occur. -- Anonymous Dissident 22:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

reprotected. The dispute has obviously not been solved. -- Anonymous Dissident 04:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC)