Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Farnsworth J. (talk | contribs) at 23:38, 14 August 2006 (→Current requests for unprotection). 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 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.

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

• Request semi-protection for this page - a persistent vandal posting from at least two anonymous IP addresses insists on changing date formats despite an established consensus, repeated requests to stop, and a couple of 24 hour blocks. --Nicknack009 21:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

  Semi-protected (before I even saw this request :) ) to allow room to discuss instead of blindly changing the details of the page - will unprotect once the IP calms down (hopefully no longer than a day or two) Cowman109 22:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

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

• Semi-protect. This page is almost constantly vandalized by IP users who make comments about Mr. Diamond's sexuality or the size of his penis.--Caliga10 19:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Declined as there is not enough activity to warrant semi-protection. I have watchlisted the page and will help remove any vandalism that pops up. Cowman109 19:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

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

An anonymous troll left insulting messages on my talk page thrice, and I reverted thrice. Cowman109 blocked the IP but the troll came back with a different IP. Cowman109 reverted and then semi-protected my talk page. However, the semi-protection was lifted by the same user after only one day. In anticipation of copious hate mail, I think a day of semi-protection is too short, and I request that the semi-protection be reinstated to ensure there won't be a repeat incident (after the copious hate mail I will get dies down). I think the optimal length of semi-protection should be a week, or longer if problems (and copious hate mail) continue. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 05:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Only because you edited my page without my permission and in a threatening way and proceeded to insult and vandalize under your IP address. --172.190.70.90 05:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protection is specifically not to be used "as a pre-emptive measure against the threat or probability of vandalism before any such vandalism has occurred." Your page was unprotected as the threat of harassment by the user in question had passed; I spoke with the user and he apologised for his actions and hurtful edit summaries, and has since agreed to stop. I will have another administrator accept or decline this request, though. Cowman109 05:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

If edits continue such that semi-protection seems the best path, we will happily re-protect. However, at the moment, it seems the threat has passed, and that the current state of protection seems fine. If you have any more problems, let us know. Cheers, EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 05:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

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

Requesting semi-protection. Continuous vandalism by sockpuppets of User:Outoftuneviolin. FrostytheSnowman 16:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Mets501 (talk) 17:33, 14 August 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.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The article, as I understand things, was protected several days ago. Everything seems quiet so it can be unprotected now. Farnsworth J. 23:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

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

Been protected to stop a very persistent vandal. The vandal in question hasn't made a single edit since the protection, so hopefully he's lost interest. I can't be sure, but I think it'll be safe to unprotect it and let the chips fall where they may.Fyre2387 21:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Unprotected. Cowman109 22:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

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

Has been protected for 3 weeks, no clue why, no information on the talk page. --badlydrawnjeff talk 19:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Libel was introduced into the article resulting in a *lot* of edits being removed from the history per WP:BLP. I don't know what other discussions are involved, but I'd say you could ask the protecting admin. I'm unwilling to unprotect it based on the information on hand. Syrthiss 20:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Discussion at Talk:LTTE is going well and there appears to be significant consensus regarding the lead paragraph. Accordingly, could I request the unprotection is reviewed? Thanks, Addhoc 16:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Unprotected. —Mets501 (talk) 17:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Addhoc 17:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Mediation is ongoing at the talk page, and we have agreed a change we'd like to make. I'd like to unprotect and give the mediation a chance to succeed. Mike Christie 10:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Unprotected -- Samir धर्म 10:55, 14 August 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.

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

I would like to see the current version replaced with this version found at . It is nearly identical to the protected version, except for the fact that the broken links and citations have been repaired. -- 72.139.185.19 04:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. Performed history merge. —Mets501 (talk) 13:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Fullfilled/denied requests

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

• Semi-protect. This has been a popular page for vandals to put wrong dates, and earlier today, a registered vandal has been putting info about a "PBS 2". Georgia guy 17:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

 Declined Not enough activity to warrant semi-protection. It was mostly one vandal who has now been blocked. —Mets501 (talk) 17:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Permanently or temporarily?? The log says one month, which means it will expire in 3 weeks from now. Also, please note that a vandal can go under different IP's. Georgia guy 17:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Bible scientific foreknowledge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Requesting Semi-protection. Another editor has been making the same deletion repeatedly and appears to be doing it anonymously to dodge identification. Semi-protection stopped this, but it has been removed, and the behavior is resumed. Please leave on for longer this time. The Crow 16:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

 Declined - Not enough activity to warrant semi-protection —Mets501 (talk) 17:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Choujuu Sentai Liveman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (and others, see summary)

Requesting Semi-protection. Lately, some IP editors have been adding patent nonsense, removing information (and quite frequently replacing them with patent nonsense), and adding false information. They do not stop, even after being warned. They are doing this to multiple pages: aside from Choujuu Sentai Liveman (which is being hit the hardest), they are vandalising Hikari Sentai Maskman, Cho Denshi Bioman, Kyouryuu Sentai ZyuRanger, Dai Sentai Goggle V, Kousoku Sentai Turboranger, and Chikyuu Sentai Fiveman. jgp (T|C) 15:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protecting now. —Mets501 (talk) 17:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Mortal Kombat: Devastation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Requesting Semi-protection. Anonymous users are constantly editing the article, adding false or unproved information, with no sources what so ever to back them up. Vandals constantly edit the page adding nonsense, such as statements not to believe the information on the page, although with the amount of false information going in and out of the page every day, it's hardly surprising. All of the edit's I have seen so far that have either been false, unsourced, POV, or poorly written in a 'non-encyclopedic' fashion are all by anonymous users, and Semi-protection would help greatly in the matter. Thankyou - The Haunted Angel 13:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Mets501 (talk) 13:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much ^_^ -The Haunted Angel 13:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

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

Requesting Semi-protection. Anonymous vandals continually make short work of this page. If you look at the history, you'll see that almost every day there are random IP address edits, all of which have to be quickly reverted. Please consider this page for semi-protection. Thanks! Chuchunezumi 13:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Mets501 (talk) 13:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

High school musical (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection - This article is continuously vandalised by anonymous editors. They will either fill the article with POV statements about the characters or add nonsense information to the article that doesn't belong there anyway. I have seen on more than one occasion this nonsense being left in the article and not reverted. Again, a significant portion of these edits have been done anonymously. --Klaser 02:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Mets501 (talk) 03:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Star Jones Reynolds (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This page has been protected for over a month. However, the controversy involving Reynolds being fired from The View seems to have died down, as can be seen by the fact that there have been only 8 edits to the article's talk page in the last two weeks. The article can either be dropped to semi-protection or unprotected entirely. I note that an editor seems to have removed the {{protected}} template from the article but the article still appears to be protected. --Metropolitan90 06:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Unprotected. It seems Chihuaha forgot to actually unprotect the article, heh. Cowman109 06:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Television episode (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Full Protection Hello, A user who has been asked to converse continues to remove an optional field from a template. This is extremley dispruptive when it causes damage to pages it is used on (hundreds). Semi-Protection will not suffice as he is a sysop and has been editing for some time. This has already been put through before and rejected by annother user, his last revert was 7 hours ago but i expect he will revert again in the afternoon. Matthew Fenton (Talk | Contribs) 08:08, 14 August 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 09:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection - The article has been repeatedly vandalised over the last few months by a great many IPs, possibly coming from a single person, judging by their modus operandi. Their usual tactic is to delete a section of the article and replace it with some spam links. Over time some harmful edits did not get reverted, resulting in an article about ninety percent shorter than it originally was until I restored it recently, piece by piece. Almost immediately after the restoration, the actions continued and there have already been three vandal activities in less than a day, all in the same old manner. Denis Kasak 16:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected now. —Mets501 (talk) 17:50, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Hans Henning Atrott (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

IPs constantly try to insert personal attacks on other wikipedians (both in the article proper and on the talk page). Over the last weeks, though not constantly, I tried to remember different IPs to make their point in an NPOV manner (that is, to refrain from attacks on Germans and Christians in general) - to no avail. Gugganij 14:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The page has been semi-protected. Cowman109 16:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Power Rangers: Mystic Force (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

This page should not be protected. The person who has requested for this page to be protected lacks the complete knowledge of this season of Power Rangers to actually recognize what is and isn't an reliable source when it comes to Power Rangers Mystic Force. This person has demonstrated this lack of knowledge in the main talk page of Power Rangers and on one other Power Rangers web forum.RangerKing 18:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm tempted to decline again, as there is clearly still a potential for an edit war, however I will wait for another administrator's opinion. Nonetheless, I feel it's necessary for you to to some sort of consensus on the talk page first. Cowman109 18:59, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Television episode (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Full protection Ongoing severe edit dispute between two users. — CRAZY`(IN)`SANE 20:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The two of them seem to have stopped, so temporarily declined, but I will watch the page and protect it should the war continue. Cowman109 20:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Shakim67 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Full protection for the duration on whatever blocks may be on this user and to end the drama that continues to occur here between two users. It may also be useful to do the same protections on User talk:Can't Nobody Step To Me (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs) and User talk:CertifiedGangsta (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs) as they are sockpuppets accounts proven through the first Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Shakim67. Ryūlóng 06:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure if the page should be full protected - users should not be completely shut out from Misplaced Pages unless they are abusing their talk page, in my opinion. I'll wait for another sysop to see what they think should be done though. Cowman109 07:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Page has been full protected by Pgk for unblock request abuse. Cowman109 20:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Heavy metal in Muslim majority countries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection: Article was recently greenlit on Fark.com. Some IP vandalism has already occurred, and it is likely to get worse. -- stubblyhead | /_c 05:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Support: The site was 'Farked', and as a result, there has been a constant barrage of vandalism. As stubblyh stated, now that it has been 'greelit', there will be many more visitors driving to the article which will only increase the vandalism. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 05:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Semi protected so we don't have another Colbert Report mess. Cowman109 05:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

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

Full protection: Page has been subject to edit wars in a conflict described here, . User is convinced that this is the case and has repeatedly moved the page, even though he has no expertise in the area. Issue is also a part fo an ongoing edit-war here, here, and here. --Palffy 21:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

support (even if it is something on itself, unrelated to everything else)--Kwame Nkrumah 21:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Protected from moves as this appears to be a move warring issue. Cowman109 21:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

And I recently unprotected after speaking with those involved and given recent evidence of the official name. Should move warring continue I will reprotect it. Cowman109 03:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)