User talk:Calapez

"WP:RFP" and "WP:RPP" redirect here. You may also be looking for Wikipedia:Requests for permissions, Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission, or Wikipedia:Random page patrol.

Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.

Before requesting, read the protection policy. Full protection is used to stop edit warring between multiple users or to prevent vandalism to high-risk templates; semi-protection and pending changes are usually used to prevent IP and new user vandalism (see the rough guide to semi-protection); and move protection is used to stop pagemove revert wars. Extended confirmed protection is used where semi-protection has proved insufficient (see the rough guide to extended confirmed protection) After a page has been protected, it is listed in the page history and logs with a short rationale, and the article is listed on Special:Protectedpages. In the case of full protection due to edit warring, admins should not revert to specific versions of the page, except to get rid of obvious vandalism. Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level Request 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

this header: view • edit

Current requests for protection

Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

Naruto: The Broken Bond (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Lots of problems with IP users adding unconfirmed and false data multiple times per day.-- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Tom Daley (diver) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect - Recent upsurge of IP vandalism by fans etc. Highfields (talk, contribs, review) 14:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection - Anon. IP trying to impose undue weight without discussion. There's room to also note him about WP:3RR. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 10:32, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined, consider dispute resolution. SoWhy 10:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I figured this would be simple since it's an editor with less than 50 edits, edit-warring without discussion. How am I supposed to use dispute resolution if he won't use the talk page? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 10:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

You are both at the brink of a WP:3RR violation, I suggest reporting there, if they revert again. Report user to WP:AIV if they continue after being warned to discuss changes. Protecting this article would not comply with the protection policy regarding semi protection. SoWhy 11:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Semi-protection Input of misinformation by several IP anon editors, especially on the contestants' row. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 09:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SoWhy 10:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Full protection Edit-warring. --Walmwutter (talk) 09:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined, No edit-warring but vandalism. SoWhy 10:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 10:40, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Indefinite create protection Nothing recent, but not notable, and deleted 3 times. Can be taken to DRV if they do become notable. SpecialK(KoЯn flakes) 09:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined Judging by the fact that no recreation was tried in the last 2 weeks, I think there is no reason to salt it at the moment. I advise re-reporting if and when it gets recreated. SoWhy 10:36, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi-protection Vandalism and time wasting IP edits. --♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 10:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Vandalism by Grawp using multiple IP addresses.DiverseMentality^(Boo!) 07:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Already protected. by lucasbfr (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). SoWhy 10:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi-protection Vandalism by multiple anon IP editors at least 10 times in the last 48 hours. Cosmomancer (talk) 06:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 10:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Naruto: Ultimate Ninja (series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Multiple regular editors here complaining about IPs putting in false information and vandalizing page and asking for page protection; filing formal request after having to revert back 3 days to fix it all.-- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 10:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, Seems to be a popular target for vandals. Most of the edits are vandalism and reversions. .Chamal ^Talk ± 05:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 10:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, High amount of vandalism from anonymous IPs.DiverseMentality^(Boo!) 05:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SoWhy 10:25, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Template:Britney Spears singles (edit | [[Talk:Template:Britney Spears singles|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full Protection: People keep adding Radar to the template as a single, and it was never released as a single. ---Shadow (talk) 05:37, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined, content dispute, consider dispute resolution. I personally would suggest to add the song in brackets to note its different status as it was considered to be a single and just never released. SoWhy 10:46, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Current requests for unprotection

Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.

• To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
• Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
• Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
• If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.

Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

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

Semi-Protection: This article has been swamped with IP accounts, all remarkably similar. The page is actually fully protected right now, but I think making it semi-protected might solve most of the trouble. ðarkuncoll 00:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.. For the record, this report is misplaced (note it is under requests for unprotection). Tan | 39 15:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Note: Since it's currently fully protected, I would hope that administrators have not been vandalizing it! I think the request is for the article to be "unprotected" down to semi-protected status. — Satori Son 00:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Unprotection for salted page. I intend to create an article about a different Jeff Katz to the radio host (I mean the Kasenetz-Katz guy behind the 1910 Fruitgum Company). SpecialK(KoЯn flakes) 09:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Unprotected Have fun. I think after a year, noone will try to recreate that radio host. SoWhy 10:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Current requests for edits to a protected page

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 Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{Edit COI}} template should be used.
• Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia: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.

Name-dropping (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Please insert these names: Angelique Carrington, Tamara Harrington. --58.178.98.206 (talk) 11:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Fulfilled/denied requests

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

temporary semi-protection Vandalism.Chamal ^Talk ± 05:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined All of the vandalism is coming from one IP, and that IP is now blocked. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:45, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

semi-protect. Somehow attracts vandalism at least once a day, no idea who might be looking at this page ;) Confectionery could also be considered too. Kansaikiwi (talk) 04:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one month. Tiptoety ^talk 04:15, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

indefinite semi-protection Vandalism, Vandalism from a series of IP-socks of blocked User:Vyaghradhataki. The page had been earlier semi-protected for a temporary period but after the period had expired the user had been continuing to vandalize the page. Please note that the page has been vandalized over 5 times during the last 24 hours. The history of vandalism goes back atleast until late 2007.See here. The page has been temporarily semi-protected twice. See here. But it hasn't worked. The vandalism still continues.Ravichandar_{My coffee shop} 03:09, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of three months. Infinite isn't really an option. لennavecia 04:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection, this article has suffered tremendous vandalism averaging 2 reverts for the past month or so. ChyranandChloe (talk) 02:54, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined Although there is a significant amount of long-term vandalism, it is not overwhelming. As you noted, averaging a couple each day. Additionally, and more importantly, there are constructive edits from IPs and newly registered users, thus it would be a detriment to lose those such edits. لennavecia 04:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Temporary semi-protection, this article has suffered tremendous vandalism averaging four reverts a day. However, this article is also undergoing restructuring and may require some editorial help. ChyranandChloe (talk) 02:54, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. And the vandalism seems to come from only one or two IPs, so a block or two would do it. Goodnightmush^Talk 03:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks I'll start the crackdown. ChyranandChloe (talk) 04:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

User:John Bot II/CheckPage (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

indefinite semi-protection , The page will be a checkpage for the robot. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 02:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

So, why does it need to be protected? Tiptoety ^talk 04:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of forever. لennavecia 04:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

File:Sheldon.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

indefinite create-protection , recreation of deleted material.░▒▓Frogger3140▓▒░ (talk) 02:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Creation protected Tiptoety ^talk 04:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, A lot of vandalism the past week by IPs and non-autoconfirmed users.– RyanCross (talk) 03:37, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of four days. Tiptoety ^talk 03:54, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

Semi-Protect The same IP has vandalized the article for over a month. Thanks! E10ddie (talk) 01:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• User(s) blocked. Cenarium ^Talk 01:32, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

indefinite create-protection , Was a bogus article name created by a repeat vandal. No chance of a genuine article with this title..—Largo Plazo (talk) 00:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined Has only been deleted once. Tiptoety ^talk 00:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

As you can probably tell, it's part of this one person's ever-expanding pattern. Here's what seems to me to be a reasonable decision tree: Protect now, he comes back, nuisance is avoided; he doesn't come back, no harm done anyway because no one else will ever create this page. Don't protect now, it won't benefit anyone because no one will ever create this page; if he does come back, more vandalism. Why not protect? —Largo Plazo (talk) 00:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Because the protection policy says "Semi-protection should not be used as a pre-emptive measure". Simply because he created the page once does not mean he will be back to create it again. Until there is a pattern of recreation on the specific page there is nothing to justify protecting it. If he re-creates simply re-request protection. Tiptoety ^talk 01:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

There's obviously a pattern. Patterns don't begin and end with each single page. If they did, we'd have to start vandalism warnings over at Level 1 each time a vandal switched to a different page to attack; we'd never be able to block someone who vandalized a hundred pages a day but only touched each page once. By the way, rereading the sentence you quoted, I see it doesn't make sense: no matter how many times a page has been recreated before, creation-protecting it is inherently pre-emptive. It isn't retroactive; it isn't punitive. It prevents something from happening in the future: it's pre-emptive. Also, we aren't dealing with semi-protection here. This is full protection.—Largo Plazo (talk) 01:15, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Then allow me to quote a section of the protection policy dealing specifically with creation protection: "Administrators should not use creation protection as a pre-emptive measure, but only in response to actual events." Tiptoety ^talk 01:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but that doesn't address my comments! 1. A single abusive creation is as much an actual event as is a pair of abusive creations or a whole sequence of them. 2. As I already pointed out, the word "pre-emptive" doesn't explain your approach because creation-protection is as pre-emptive after five creations and deletions as it is after one. 3. The sentence you quoted doesn't in any way indicate that the determination must be made for each page in isolation, so it doesn't address my earlier comments related to that.—Largo Plazo (talk) 01:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I just went ahead and read Wikipedia:Page_protection#Creation_protection for myself. It doesn't say you must consider every page in isolation, and it doesn't say one occurrence is less of an "actual event" than two of them. Keeping in mind as well the dictum "Be bold!", I think that even if you didn't see it that way, it was within your discretion to take matters in hand in case like this one, where there was no downside to doing so.—Largo Plazo (talk) 01:36, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Having deleted several of them, I considered protecting them from creation. I didn't, probably by laziness, but I think the pattern of events could justify protection of those pages. Though even if we do, the vandal will find other similar titles, and adding Pibo to the local blacklist may be overkill. Cenarium ^Talk 01:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

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

temporary semi-protection Vandalism.LAAFan^sign _review 00:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Move protected —αἰτίας •discussion• 01:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —αἰτίας •discussion• 01:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Pibo Manitoba (SSR) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

indefinite create-protection , Was a bogus category created by a repeat vandal. No chance of a genuine category with this title..—Largo Plazo (talk) 00:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Creation protected -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 00:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Pibo Manitoba (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

indefinite create-protection , Was a bogus category created by a repeat vandal. No chance of a genuine category with this title..—Largo Plazo (talk) 00:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Already protected. —αἰτίας •discussion• 00:36, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Strange. The Twinkle UI told me that, so I'm surprised that it added my request anyway.—Largo Plazo (talk) 00:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Pibo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

indefinite create-protection , Was a bogus category created by a repeat vandal. No chance of a genuine category with this title..—Largo Plazo (talk) 00:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Creation protected Tiptoety ^talk 01:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Pibo Canada (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

indefinite create-protection , Was a bogus category created by a repeat vandal. No chance of a genuine category with this title..—Largo Plazo (talk) 00:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Declined Has only been deleted once. Tiptoety ^talk 01:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Arabian Peninsula

Full Protection: this article particularly prone to vandalism , Harlan wilkerson he keep adding fouls information about the article, from population, geography, to history..--Chaldeaan (talk) 15:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)