Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RegentsPark (talk | contribs) at 19:02, 1 July 2009 (→{{la|Chris Crocker (American football)}}: nea). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.

Chris Crocker (American football) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Vandalism. See here. Gordonrox24 |  18:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.--RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 19:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The Main Event Mafia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection For the last week, IP's have been constantly adding unsourced info and removing sourced info. TJ Spyke 16:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary create-protection, Re-posted and speedy deleted (G4) multiple times after being originally deleted via AfD. . - 2 ... says you, says me 16:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary full-protection. I am afraid that a bad bad edit-warring is about to erupt. Edit-warring is going on for weeks (either slowly or more intensely). During the previous days the "pro-Greek faction" took advantage of the absence of the most active "pro-Albanian" user in the article and introduced a series of changes. Today the aforementioned user is back and reverted most of these "pro-Greek" edits. I'm afraid that what is going to follow will be really nasty, and IMO action is needed.--Yannismarou (talk) 15:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

User talk:67.82.174.147 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection user talk of blocked user, User constantly removes warnings. LouriePieterse 15:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Declined - user is not blocked, and removal of warnings (an acknowledgment of having read them) is not in itself blockable. Kusma (talk) 15:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection Immediately after the protection expired, IP vandalism was back again. It seems to be only one vandal (IPs from the same provider, always the same edit – 30 → 35 millions), but as the IP changes very often, communication with the editor is not possible. --Jaellee (talk) 14:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. User is clearly not going to go away and has become very disruptive. Camaron · Christopher · talk 15:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Semi-protect. Repeated reverts to a mediated solution by anonymous users. Wikiant (talk) 12:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Semi-protect. Massive vandalism by several IPs. The last semi-protection expired after 6 months on June 18th and the vandalism continued by return. --R.Schuster (talk) 10:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 10:49, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Repeated vandalism from multiple sources. Escape Orbit 08:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Speak of a vandal magnet... Regards SoWhy 10:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Richard Daniel Roman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection spambot target, Constantly under vandalism from various registered users. LouriePieterse 07:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 07:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Semi-protect. vandalism. Anon user/s persistent in adding hoax information to this article during the last month. -danngarcia (talk) 06:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Declined, only twice in the last 3 days, can be handled by reporting IPs to WP:AIV. SoWhy 07:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection IP hopping spammer (previously Brandbihari (talk · contribs) Brandbihari2 (talk · contribs) + several 59.94.xx.xx IPs) persistently adding links to his website since at least mid-May. Abecedare (talk) 05:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 07:44, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary indefinite protection dispute, This my second request for protection based on repeated reverts that restore a list of supposedly notable residents. I am unsure if this is one user using multiple IP addresses or multiple users; regardless, they have ignored my concern that these notable residents should be cited for their notability per WP:BIO. See comment at Talk:Burewala. Barkeep 04:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I blocked the latest IPs and I don't believe this has enough recent disruptive activity, but I'll leave the actual judgment to another administrator. Enigma 05:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Declined, both IPs are blocked, re-request if disruptption returns. Regards SoWhy 07:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection - high visibility article, related to recent Jackson death, additions of rumored, unsourced information. Gage (talk) 02:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 07:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Would be wise to protect this article for a day or two, has already received some bad edits and it will only get worse I would guess. Trust me on this one. . —Krm500 23:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Surprisingly it doesn't seam necessary so I withdraw my request. —Krm500 03:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Done DMacks (talk) 04:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

North Chelmsford, Massachusetts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection one week Same group of people that were vandalizing the Chelmsford, Massachusetts have moved over here. That page has already been protected - can we do the same for this article? And what if they move to another article? CSZero (talk) 21:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Declined, if the same IPs continue, one can be taken care of by a range block and the other can be blocked as well. Don't forget to warn them though. Regards SoWhy 07:36, 1 July 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.

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

Page has recently been protected because not enough external sources were provided to make it notable. After discussion with the user who deleted the page five legitimate external and independent references have been collected to prove notability.

Not unprotected – Please create a sourced version of this article in a subpage or your userspace. When this is done, please make the request again, or ask any administrator to move the page for you. SoWhy 07:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Created sourced page under Userpage: Aislingdonnelly. All feedback is welcome! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aislingdonnelly (talk • contribs) 13:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Page has been recently protected because of a small dispute on a very specific point, which has been discussed in the mean time by editors and on which a consensus has been achieved. (See end of section ) The protection is no longer justified. --Dessources (talk) 16:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Unprotected (as the protecting admin did not reply to an inquiry about it within the last 2 days). Regards SoWhy 07:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

Page has been semi protected for a long time, before January, previous requests for uunprotection on the talk page have been ignored or ridiculed. Sephiroth storm (talk) 07:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Note: Please try to ask the protecting admin AndonicO (talk · contribs) first. Regards SoWhy 09:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea who that is, like I said, Im not going to crawl through the logs. Sephiroth storm (talk) 00:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

As I said, it was AndonicO (talk · contribs). Regards SoWhy 07:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, thought it was your name. Sephiroth storm (talk) 13:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

The group has released their first single and has an upcoming album to be released soon. Also, the group is signed by a huge record, Interscope. There are a lot of sources that can form the article including their official website, official page at Interscope Records' website and also their myspaces and twitters. It's about time to unprotect the page. DantODB (talk) 19:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Not unprotected – Please create a sourced version of this article in a subpage or your userspace. When this is done, please make the request again, or ask any administrator to move the page for you. None of those you mentioned are reliable sources that would be allowed though. Regards SoWhy 07:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

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

It has a full-protection on it for almost no reason at all, IP users were constantly vandalizing it, and users were simply reverting, I could understand semi-protecting it, but why the full protection? It expires on July 25 It's ridiculous to have the article protected that long against faithful Misplaced Pages users, and I personally have a lot of fixes to make on it myself. • GunMetal Angel 00:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Note: Ask the protecting admin KrakatoaKatie (talk · contribs) first please. SoWhy 07:25, 1 July 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.

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

Not sure if this is the right place, but the template is about 11 hours overdue for an update. Thanks, MacMed_stalk 03:14, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Note: Report such things that require general admin attention to WP:ANI or WP:AN. SoWhy 09:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Fulfilled/denied requests

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

Indefinite create-protection, Nonsense page. Abce2|Free LemonadeOnly 25 cents! 20:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Creation protected, but only for one month, in case a notable Anthony Brocklehurst comes along. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:40, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary full protection vandalism, I appreciate the previous protection of this page, but unfortunately that was for only 3 days. Constant vandalism has occurred since protection was lifted. Can protection return? Preferably for a week or two. ThaKid555 (talk) 19:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. DMacks (talk) 21:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection vandalism, Blocked editor(s) editing from IP range adding unsourced content against consensus. Pinkadelica 19:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of four days. Tiptoety 04:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

F1 2010 (video game) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent anonymous vandalism. The problem with this page is that the page is called F1 2010; however, sources say that the game will be based on the 2009 season, not the 2010 season. Unfortunately, many anonymous users keep changing "2009" to "2010". Despite several hidden comments, there has been basically the same edit again and again; 15 reverts (from me and several other users) in the last 18 days. Darth Newdar (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I've boldly applied full protection to the wrong version. The sources in the article give contradictory information (source #3 supports the 2009 date, source #4 shows 2010 season for some platforms) -- it would be a really good idea for you to drop the IPs a line on their talk pages and get them to discuss things on the article talk page.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Griefing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection. IP vandalism by one "Lord Wulf" and other griefers/trolls on June 30 in essay and talk page that defaces the authors. Undid the change but suspect there will be more incidents. --Thecitrusking (talk) 19:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. –Juliancolton |  19:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection, persistent IP vandalism there has been 4 incidents today alone despite warnings. Previous semi-protection eliminated the problem completely. Christian1985 (talk) 18:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. –Juliancolton |  19:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. IP vandalism following news releases today. — HelloAnnyong 17:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection, Unsourced speculation/crystal balling based on rumors of "impending" signing with Chelsea. Should note that it was impending back in late May too. Mosmof (talk) 15:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. DMacks (talk) 16:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Night of Champions (2009) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection - future professional wrestling pay-per-view that is subject to a lot of speculation and the addition of unsourced information. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 14:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of until 27 July, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

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

Indefinite Semi-protection, IP vandalism stopped completely with temporary semi-protection, it has no returned and the page is getting massive IP vandalism with users ignoring warnings. Christian1985 (talk) 11:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 11:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

.999 Refutation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi, I'd like to request protection and non-deletion for the page ".999 Refutation". This page presents valid information but is unable to provide "adequate formal online sources" as this is a topic that has been for many years frowned upon by the mathematical community. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nameuserrandom1234 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Declined, if you cannot provide sources to establish notability, then you must face the risk of deletion. As the article was deleted already, please talk to the deleting admin or request deletion review. Regards SoWhy 11:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

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

Full protection debate about the population Greatgenius (talk) 10:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Consider dispute resolution. SoWhy 11:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Declined Users warned of 3RR and encouraged to discuss on the talk page. If they do not, then re-report here for protection, or at WP:AN3 for 3RR vio after warning. Nja 11:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Korean International School of Hong Kong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection dynamic (?) IP editor repeatedly adding defamatory material "sourced" to PDFs of alleged school minutes hosted on file-sharing networks over past several days . cab (talk) 10:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There are at least two active editors who can revert the edits by the two IPs who are causing issue. Warn them appropriately on their talk pages when reverting and if they get to the final warning then report to WP:AIV so that they can be blocked. Nja 11:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Note to warn them appropriately on their talk pages when reverting so it's easier for admins to consider blocking.

Sorry Nja247, I protected before I saw you declining it. Feel free to revert me. Regards SoWhy 11:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

It's okay, I just did it above to you, though at least there it was the same conclusion ;-) Nja 11:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

User:Tyw7/signature (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and User:Tyw7/Contributions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi move protect Moving these templates will ruin my signature. I want to prevent anybody but me moving the templates. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 12:30, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Is there some reason to think they'll be moved? The reason I ask is that semi move protection will still allow any auto-confirmed user to move them, and full protection will keep you from moving them.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:58, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

If I put full protection, only admins can move it? I worry that some vandal MIGHT move it. This will ruin the links in my signature, isn't it? --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions) 14:01, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Looking at WP:SIG, it seems like this kind of a page is discouraged. (I'm not an expert on this, just going by what I'm reading.) Your sig is small enough that it will fit in the signature box of your preferences, which will prevent any mischief and be kinder to the servers. Then you'll have no vandal worries.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Note that there's also some discussion on it on my talk page. Nja 11:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Declined - There is no such thing as semi move protection. Only autoconfirmed users can move pages anyways. Also, per the above, you really should not be substituting your signature anyways. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC)