Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dionyseus (talk | contribs) at 04:15, 7 December 2006 (→{{La|Midnight_Syndicate}}). 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.

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

'Semi-protection', seems to be suffering quite a lot of random IP nonsense lately. K. Lástocska 04:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

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

'Semi protection' Several anon users with rotating IP addresses keep editing pages and vandalizing the pages. Could use a reversion too. Tedyc03 03:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi protection anon user with rotating IP keeps editing page which is supposed to be a redirect. --Strothra 03:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

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

full protectionagainst creation. It has been deleted twice today, related to already protected page Spinal Cord (music band) and requested below Blaze Burn. -- dockingman 22:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Fully protectedto prevent recreation. Nishkid64 22:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. The Vedas article has been vandalized quite heavily in the past few weeks by users and/or bots from rotating anonymous IPs. Recent vandalism has been made by 169.204.150.111, who has also targeted articles like François Duvalier, Fox News Channel, and Food. Registered contributors managed to revert 2 changes, but the vandal is diligent in its work. Another recent vandal is 220.225.244.196, who has also targeted Star Wars. I have attempted to maintain the integrity of the article by reverting vandalism as quickly as possible, but the vandalism returns at a fairly quick rate. Semi-protection will at the minimum permit registered contributors to manage the article effectively. Sarayuparin 22:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 22:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

169.204.150.111 has been blocked from editing. Nishkid64 22:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

full protection against creation. It has been created 4 times today and speedy deleted 3 times. User keeps on creating sockpuppets (current is Spinalcords (talk · contribs), previous were Spinalcord (talk · contribs) and Cyberpunker (talk · contribs)) -- dockingman 22:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Fully protected to prevent recreation. Nishkid64 22:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

semi-protection has been vandalized three times by Czexian since its unprotection. 208.138.31.76 21:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 22:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

semi-protection seems to have been under siege form IPs tongith. High-rate of vandlaism has meant some bit sof vandalism have gone un-reverted. I think it's all straightened out now, but would benefit from a period of calm. David Underdown 21:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 22:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. same as below, Daily vandalisms from anon IP's Hu12 21:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 22:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. Daily vandalisms from anon IP's Hu12 21:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 22:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Bowl Championship Series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection since the recent BCS Bowls were announced it has been vandalized many times. I expect it to continue through at least January 8, 2007, and even increase slightly before then, when the major contention occurs.. that National Championship Game. All (or at least very much most) have been by IPs. --MECU≈talk 21:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 22:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. Anon IP continously attempts to enter large portions into article which are not relevant to topic for days. Other editors have requested him to cease. --Strothra 20:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. I'm protecting because I think the anon vandal is going to come back after the 3RR block. Nishkid64 22:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. Continual vandalism from rotating anon IPs.--Strothra 18:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected--Húsönd 19:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

King Edward's School, Birmingham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. There has been continual vandalism on the page for over a week now from rotating IP Woodym555 18:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Declined for now. The two users who were causing most disruption have received final warnings and seem to have stopped.--Húsönd 19:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. Anon with rotating IP attempting to edit war over the insertion of text which is a violation of WP:NOT. --Strothra 18:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected--Húsönd 19:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. There have been plenty of ridiculous vandalism attacks to the Kennet School page recently. This has happened before as well. A semi-protection permanently would be preferable. Thank you, CR7 18:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Declined for now, most recent vandalism by a couple of IPs who seem to have stopped now. Request protection again if vandalism resumes by multiple IPs.--Húsönd 19:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. Frequent target of IP and new user vandalism; increasing due to upcoming anniversary of Lennon's death (Dec 8). Request semi-protection at least through weekend, possibly longer. Thx. --Tvoz 17:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected Sounds plausible, although the vandalism seems to have decreased today.--Húsönd 19:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. Persistent target of vandalism (for obvious reasons). Has been semi-protected twice before and each time it's unprotected, it's almost solid vandalism. --Dgies 17:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected--Húsönd 19:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. Lost its semi protection recently and vandalisers came back on mass. Needs permanent semi protection really. SenorKristobbal 17:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Most recent vandalism caused by a single IP.--Húsönd 19:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection. Has been constantly vandalized by anons and new users. A temporary protection until they knock it off. -- xompanthy 16:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.--Húsönd 19:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection or, failing Full-Protection for constant vandalism. All vandalism is by this user - 15:51, 6 December 2006 Jvc107 (Talk | contribs) (→Trivia) SF100 16:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)SF100

Wouldn't a temporary user ban (with autoblock) work better? --Dgies 17:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm new to this so I didnt know that was an option SF100 18:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)SF100

When they vandalize, add {{subst:test4|Reverend Bob Levy}} ~~~~ to their user talk page, and if they keep it up, report them at Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism. You could try reporting them there now but you might not get a block due to insufficient warnings having being given. --Dgies 18:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 22:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

University of Mary Washington (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. "Vanished" spammer/vandal/attacker Analyzethis (contribs) is back spamming his middlesell.com links through 199.111.74.73, one of his multiple IP accounts. Undesirable alternative to semi-protection: blocking shared IPs. --A. B. 06:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.--Húsönd 19:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protect -Daniel575 has been banned and has already created one (and maybe 2) sockpuppets. I am requesting a semi-protect so that his new incarnations can't edit. He has shown many times that he believes that he is above Wiki rules. Yossiea 20:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Ehrliche_Yid and the IP guy are the same user as Daniel (who was banned). EY has already been banned as a sock puppet. Yossiea 21:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. If more sockpuppets appear, take them to WP:AIV on sight (and mention sockmaster).--Húsönd 19:34, 6 December 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.

Palestine Peace Not Apartheid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Would like to add more facts for the book pleace, especially links to reviews and correction of spelling mistakes. Menj 00:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

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

The site has been protected for quite a while now. Tājik 13:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

unprotected; let's see if the edit warring/vandalism resumes...Lectonar 18:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

There's was some minor vandalism a week ago by one anon IP; I don't think there's much reason to keep the tag long term. -- Kendrick7 18:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Fully protected due to revert warring. There's an edit war going on right now. I'll fully protect right now, but I'll unprotect completely after everything is settled. Nishkid64 22:56, 6 December 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.

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

I requested that the article Midnight_Syndicate be reverted to this correct version and re-protected, but the admin who originally protected it in its incorrect form (during an edit war) states that although my citations are a good arguement for granting the request, he "has no time to do so" and suggested I contact another admin. This is the user talk page: User_talk:Jaranda#Wrong_version:_Request_for_rv_and_protection. As I expained there, the wrong version was protected, all my citations were previously removed by User:Skinny_McGee (both that editor and myself were engaged in an edit war). I have tried to discuss the matters we are opposing on, and he has refused all cites and does not cite anything verifiable of his own to support the removal of the material I wrote, nor for the promotional type of edits he had been inserting. The page is factually incorrect as it stands, highly self-promotional, and the other editor has engaged in deceptive editing, changing creditentials of the subjects, changing dates and the like to alter the context of the article and to present a subtle yet misleading version of the facts. We have tried Rfc but no one commented as to the issues being disputed (much of the Talk:Midnight_Syndicate was archived), and only one other editor had been commenting and reverting my edits to those of User:Skinny_McGee, yet has written and cited nothing at all. Socks were checked. One was found for me, Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/GuardianZ but the second check that was also requested returned inconclusive, and one was done on Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Skinny_McGee and was found to be conclusive with one other sock (reverting once and removing my citations) and 2 other sleeper socks. It's now down to just the two of us and only a single issue that we are butting heads on, and I really don't think we will ever agree given the circumstances. But meanwhile the rest of the article is wrong. Could you please revert to the correct version?this correct version and, if possible, also change the city name from Cleveland to Chardon, as proved in citations and band's website. Thank you. GuardianZ 03:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

First of all User:Jaranda only said WP:CITE is a valid argument, however because of User:Jaranda's lack of time he/she didn't have time to read the discussion page and thus did not know that we cannot use the citations User:GuardianZ wants to add because they are coming from Midnight Syndicate's main rivals, and their statements are unverifiable. Secondly, User:GuardianZ used his sockpuppet User:Oroboros_1 to tagteam on the Midnight Syndicate article, whereas User:Skinny_McGee's sockpuppet did not make any violations and the user has explained that it was her husband. Thirdly, the second check that User:GuardianZ mentions was actually a check to see if he was User:Peacekpr, the result for that check was inconclusive. Dionyseus 04:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Please take a few minutes to review the Midnight Syndicate talk page and you will get a pretty clear picture of where our debate stands. I believe GuardianZ is trying to change the article so that it is more favorable to a former business partner. She repeatedly cites a defamatory website the former business partner created to discredit Midnight Syndicate and interviews in which said business partner defames the band and its founder, Edward Douglas. I am just trying to preserve the integrity of the article.

You should also know that GuardianZ and her proven sock puppet Oroboros 1 (now indefinitely blocked) have a history of twisting facts. For instance, she states above that I have a sock that reverted the article once and removed her citations. That's not true. First of all, I've already explained said sock (Defender99) was my husband. Second, the edit he made actually added a very non-controversial fact to the article and removed nothing. I'm sorry, but I do not know how to cite that. The edit was made to the Midnight Syndicate article on Nov. 1 at 15:00. - Skinny McGee 04:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Skinny, to cite the difference you only need to open the page and copy the url, and then place the url like you would for a website url by enclosing the url with a single bracket per side. Here is the edit difference you are talking about, and you are correct that User:GuardianZ is twisting facts, User:Defender99 did not remove anything, he added: . Dionyseus 04:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Fulfilled/denied requests

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

Full protection requested- constant reverting back and forth. There is no set agreement on how the match order for the upcoming event will be setup. I think it's best to lock the page until disputes are settled. Page is already semi-protected, but that's not enough in this case. The article controllers need to stop and discuss things before assuming their opinion is right. People can't seem to edit the page much, without getting reverted by several users that won't discuss things first. RobJ1981 00:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Fully protected -- tariqabjotu 01:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection requested - this article suffers from a relentless stream of vandalism and graffiti. It is semi-protected every so often and the noise vanishes, only to reappear immediately upon being unprotected. --Ckatz_spy 00:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 00:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Protection was requested because of flaming and un-supported additions by User:Tommysun. Tommysun has been blocked and seems to have stopped for the time being. I suggest that we change from a complete lock to a block on unregistered edits only. The latter is advisable because Tommysun has previously made anonymous edits and may do so again. Michaelbusch 21:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Not unprotected. He's no longer blocked, and the dispute hasn't been resolved. -- Steel 21:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The Arbitration Committee has posted their ruling at User talk:Tommysun. The dispute was strictly Tommysun's flaming. Michaelbusch 21:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, ok then. Unprotected -- Steel 21:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection or, failing Full-Protection for ridiculous amounts of vandalism. Patstuart 15:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Already protected. -- Steel 15:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Randolph High School (New Jersey) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I am asking that you look at this request again. User:Joefuf is determinedly replacing the humorousm uncited, unencyclopaedic 'list of atudents' back every time I remove it. A short protection period might cool them off. raining girl 14:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Declined. He's added it only twice, and that was before his last talk page message asking him to stop. -- Steel 15:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

William I of England (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. High level of vandalism by anonymous users. Perhaps it would be good to ban anonymous users from editing this page. Jvhertum 12:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 14:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Renaissance College Hong Kong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. IP addresses are always vandal the page by putting, "Yeah! We are the best!" and other personal opinions. It's difficult to block them too. --Jacklau96’’(Talk) 10:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 14:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

This article has received 12 vandal edits in the past 24 hours, 8 of which were made in the last 60 minutes. Please semi-protect it. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 14:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection Continuous and repeated vandalism by roaming IPs. --Strothra 06:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 14:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection Continuous and repeated vandalism by different people. Jellocube27 13:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 14:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Prussian Blue (duo) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection requested due to a single long-term vandal who is obsessed with making extremely libelous edits to this article. Tonight his IP was 141.154.246.102 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log); last night it was 151.203.15.96 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log); refer to this talk page for a partial list of previous IP's from which he has posted the same libelous comments, typically with innocuous and misleading edit summaries. This has been going on since at least September 25 with 151.203.203.126 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) -- Jim Douglas _(contribs) 04:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected Although I have sympathy for the vandal.--Húsönd 05:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection the article is constantly vandalized by anonymous IPs.¤~Persian Poet Gal 04:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected--Húsönd 05:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Type 90 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection - A revert war has begun between various anonymouse editors and two registered editors. Disputes over sourcing, as well. 3R1C 04:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.--Húsönd 04:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

William Lyon Mackenzie Collegiate Institute (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection - an incredible amount of IP vandalism today --BigDT 04:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected Rampant vandalism.--Húsönd 04:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection - Continued poorly-spelled vanity edits about something called the "Weiner Section," false sourcing. Brainslug 04:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected Edit war with new user. Try taking the issue to the talk page.--Húsönd 04:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

St. Mark's School of Texas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection - IP vandalism. TerriersFan 03:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected--Húsönd 04:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection - new and anon IP users keep removing maintainence and related tags off this article and put statements without citing reference and also removing tags without any reason! --Mikecraig 02:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Declined Better warn the main user who's removing the tags (Butterflykisses723) rather than having the article protected. Furthermore, this user's account is more than 4 days old so only full protection would be effective against him anyway.--Húsönd 04:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection repeatedly struck by vandals.¤~Persian Poet Gal 02:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected--Húsönd 04:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)