Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

"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.

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

Semi Protect to prevent frequent and persistent IP vandalism C ^thirty-three 03:46, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

• Semi-protected for a period of 2 fortnights, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.

WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2008 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

full protection +expiry 1 month, Full protection: Vandalism, repetitive additions of unsourced names to a roster of an upcoming professional wrestling video game. Mainly by IPs (even though the page has semi-protection), some registered users. Before protection is enacted, article should be revised to the version that was lasted edited by User:Socby19. That is the most up-to-date, and accurate version that there should be. Socby19 03:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)Socby19

• Semi-protected by TimVickers. Heimstern Läufer 04:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, Biography of Head Football Coach constantly vandalized by rival fan.CincyUte 02:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Prodego ^talk 03:20, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Z.E.R.O. (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, My talk page has been recently vandalized by vandals. Please protect this page until further vandalism occurs. — ^tz (Talk) (Contribs) Sat 02:30:25 2007-05-05 02:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. – Steel 02:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protect. Random vandalism, manily by IPs. Ashura96 19:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

• Done Walton ^{Need some help?} 19:57, 2 May 2007 (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.

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

There's no edit war, no vandalism, no wikipedia policy violations. Therefore, the protection of this page violates WP:PROT and it should be unprotected.

Declined, Hi Verdict!! :) - Alison ☺ 01:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Broken/\x7e\x7e\x7e\x7e (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This is a protected redirect with an invalid name, so there's no reason to keep it protected. Actually it could be deleted immediately (I was just going to add {{db-g6}} to it anyway), but for some reason there's no place to ask for speedy deletion of protected pages. :-) --Derlay 23:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Declined - deleted it instead :) Protected almost a year. Previous edit war redir (it actually refers to "~~~~") Alison ☺ 00:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

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

This has been protected long enough, it should be safe to allow normal editing by now. RFerreira 05:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Declined, - can you ask the protecting admin, User:Bastique about this? - Alison ☺ 05:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Current requests for significant 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.

Fulfilled/denied requests

Wasatch Junior High (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection +expiry 1 month, Semi-protection: Vandalism, Constant vandalism from Wasatch's IP address KeybladeSephi ^(Talk) _{(Contributions)} 22:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Alison ☺ 22:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

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

Semi-protect. Constant IP vandalism. I have been watching this article for months, and I feel that permanent semi-protection is needed. See past IP edits for evidence. יהושועEric 22:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - borderline - Alison ☺ 23:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

There is no constant IP vandalism. There is a dispute as to a libelous use of opinion that a clearly politically motivated poster refuses to alter. This page is a stunning example of Liberal slander and censorship by Wikipeda

Coca-Cola (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi Protect to prevent frequent IP vandalism -- Rodrigo123456 21:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Cbrown1023 talk 21:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

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

Full protect Article is the subject of an ongoing edit war, in which some of the parties involved are making sweeping changes without consultation of the talk page (it is a controversial article). The parties involved have resorted to increasingly personal attacks on one another. One party in particular is accusing the other party of vandalism. The edits by two of the involved parties contain serious violations of WP:Verifiability and WP:NPOV, and the discourse among the involved parties makes clear that none are assuming good faith. Informal mediation has thus far been ineffective and though I feel it would be beneficial for the page to be sent to Arbitration, the aformentioned user has demonstrated that he will continue to edit his revisions into the page regardless of its status. As the article is controversial and at the moment relatively NPOV, I feel strongly that it is to the detriment of the readers if major changes are made to the article by any of the involved parties until and unless the edit war subsides or formal arbitration is completed. --Interested2 19:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Declined, this isn't much of an edit war. Try the various avenues of dispute resolution. – Steel 19:51, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Informal mediation has been attempted, with no success. The mediator involved has yet to refer this issue to arbitration, though I remain hopeful they will do so. None of the parties involved are willing to negotitate, and are being quite unreasonable. The article needs to be protected, if only to prevent readers from being misled by the massively NPOV revisions that certain editors continue to insert into the article as fact. --Interested2 20:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

There is no edit war going on (Two reverts today for the first time in ages). – Steel 20:07, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

The fact that it is slow does not mean there is no edit war. The recent lack of revisions was due to its status in informal mediation. The article has been the subject of significant and contentious revisions for over a year. Clearly, though, you've rendered your decision. (And hence I'm not going to try to contest it further). --Interested2 20:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Chinese Americans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The one editor that was reverting against all other editors have been placed on revert parole for one year, limited to only one revert per article per week.[1] There is no longer any danger of edit warring. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected - looks fine now. Main reverter now prevented by RFAr case - Alison ☺ 20:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

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

This is a fully protected redirect to CKY (band), which is OK, however I'm a little puzzled as to why it's protected. There was an article there before it was turned into a redirect, and the protection seems to have been an attempt to stop the article's creator from turning the redirect back into an article. However, with no other history, and no record of deletion, the user doesn't seem to have made repeated attempts to recreate the article prior to this protection, and they haven't edited in over a month anyway. More importantly, full protection is not an appropriate way to deal with a single user (except protection of blocked users' talk pages) – Gurch 19:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected, the user this was apparently trying to protect against has no edits since March. Thryduulf 19:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Gumball 3000 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semiprotect Article documents a current event, but is in need of cleanup and editing for neutral point of view. Reverts by anonymous user who do not like the rally to be called "controversial" interfere with cleanup. Requesting semiprotection until the storm is over. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 18:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Declined, Right now, a lot of anon editors are making useful contributions and it would not be appropriate to lock them out in what's ostensibly a dispute over content - Alison ☺ 18:51, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

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

Full protect. A tedious edit war has broken out between some users who really should (and do) know better. -- ChrisO 18:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Declined - I recognise some of those names! However, it looks from the talk page like compromise can and will be reached. Note that one of the editors at least has overstepped WP:3RR and that another has apologised to one editor for reverting. Let's try work things out before prot Alison ☺ 18:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protect. Frequent IP vandalism. Zophar 18:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Alison ☺ 18:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

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

Semi Protect or Full Protect (?). Still getting Colbert vandalism from anon IPs... It had been semi-protected for a month, during that time I think their where only 1 or 2 minor good faith edits, the rest was continuing vandalism from sleeper accounts. It doesn't seem like there is anyone actively contributing to the page, and it doesn't seem well watchlisted (I do watchlist it, but several vandalisms have gone un-reverted for up to half a day or more). Those 2 factors suggest we should re-instate full protection. At the very least, long term semi-protection. Danski14^(talk) 18:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a month and a half. Not enough sleeper vandalism to warrant full protection. —dgies^t_c 18:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

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

semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, Too many ips have vandalized this page over the past few days. And it is a featured article. Elfin341 18:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - borderline amounts of vandalism - Alison ☺ 18:32, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

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

Full protection. Page is already semi-protected; this has done little to halt a months-long revert war. Parties need a cooldown and to start discussing changes in the talk page. --Hiddekel 18:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Fully protected Due to edit war escalation. —dgies^t_c 18:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Ravena, New York (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection +expiry 2 weeks, Semi-protection: Vandalism, Massive vandalism from March 26 onward Blueboy96 17:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Michaelas¹⁰ 17:42, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

User talk:207.207.127.254 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I'd like to request that User talk:207.207.127.254 be unprotected if possible. ATren, a user who seems to like to follow me around and troll me, requested it to be protected after I modified my own talk page. This was just after reading Wikipedia's policy on talk pages, and I thought I understood that I was allowed to modify others' comments on my own page. Of course, this was meant to be a joke more than anything else, but ATren (who must be watching my talk page constantly) quickly told on me to an admin, and now I can't edit it at all. If this page is unprotected, I'd use this opportunity to archive old comments, as I just read a tutorial on how to do so. Thanks, -Norvig — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.207.127.254 (talk • contribs)

Declined - for a number of reasons. While your address is not blocked right now, you've been repeatedly modifying others' comments. Furthermore, the talk page was previously protected, expired and you did it again. Note that this talk page is shared by a university and is thus potentially used by many people, as has repeatedly been pointed out to you. You really should consider creating your own account Alison ☺ 18:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

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

Requesting unprotection - page was protected by User:Betacommand who was in a content dispute on this page and has subsequently been de-sysopped per Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand. Catchpole 08:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected - unprotected as I have concerns re. talk page and press reports. This unprot is no reflection upon User:Betacommand's decision or admin status. As far as I'm concerned, his comments about respecting WP:BLP still apply Alison ☺ 17:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Note: Protection has not been removed but has been reduced to semi-protection at this time - Alison ☺ 18:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)