Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sp (talk | contribs) at 11:36, 11 September 2007 (→‎{{la|Health}}). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


"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.
    Shortcuts

    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 unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level
    Request a specific edit to a protected page
    Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
    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.

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

    semi-protection +expiry 3 hours, Semi protection: Vandalism, Lots of anon vandalism today.Spryde 11:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect Frequent adding of nonsense nicknames from IP addresses - I have reverted three times in the last week. Vandalism is always one of two forms, either changing middle name or adding 'known as' nickname. Fedgin | Talk 10:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, Only three instances of vandalism in the last two weeks don't seem to constitute enough activity to warrant protection at this time. Should this pattern increase, please feel free to re-submit. Phaedriel - 10:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Sorenw 10:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Phaedriel - 10:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    The Chaser's War on Everything (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protect It is reasonably expected that the article will be innundated with vandalism over the next few days, with a controversial segment being broadcast in 24 hours, with regards to a controversial stunt undertaken by the television program during APEC Australia 2007. A semi-protect is requested in order to reduce any vandalism that will take place in the next few days. Stickeylabel 09:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - what you say is correct, and there has been a bit of vandalism all the same. 1 week should cover things. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 10:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Richard III of England (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protect Frequent vandalism adding silly information, generally from anonymous users on a fairly regular basis. Bevo74 06:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect Frequent vandalism changing the article to discuss a non-notable band with the same name. Vandalism is coming from a promo account as well as several IPs. Requesting semi-protection to eliminate at least IP editing, and possibly a block of the user, which will be discussed here. GlassCobra (talk • contribs) 05:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. --DarkFalls talk 06:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection +expiry 1 week, Semi-protection: Vandalism, vandilism of new users and ips over recent days Blacksmith talk 05:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC).Blacksmith talk 05:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --DarkFalls talk 06:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect; vandals persisting in replacing the band's genre with "best band" or other similar vandalism. Hardly any positive contribution at all recently. Sebi [talk] 05:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - hopefully this can stem the problem. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 06:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection +expiry 1 day, Semi-protection: Vandalism, IP vandals tag teaming article..Dean Wormer 05:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --DarkFalls talk 06:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism.east.718 03:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --DarkFalls talk 06:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Videos of Osama bin Laden (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, Because of the approaching date (September 11th), and the fact that people will start searching "Osama Bin Laden" increasing traffic, and the persistent recent vandalism on this page (other than a few good edits done recently by registered users), I'm asking to please semi-protect this page for the next 24 hours so anon IP's can't vandalize it. Thank you .DigitalNinja 03:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined There is only 1 recent vandalism edit. We don't do pre-emptive protection. Feel free to request again if it gets bad. Mr.Z-man 04:15, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem, it's on my watch list. Thanks for taking a look at it. I'll keep an eye on it. :) DigitalNinja 04:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism; nonsense information about "Claudio Palmiero" constantly added in family section by unregistered users; reverted three times in the past five days alone. Beemer69 03:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mr.Z-man 04:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. τßōиЄ2001 02:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - hopefully the great amount of IP vandalism will have stemmed after this time. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 03:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Wangan Midnight Maximum Tune (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protection: Vandalism, out of the recent 40 edits there are up to 10 of them are the ones adding false or unsourced information repeatedly. This situation has been going on for 6 days now. Blackhawk charlie2003 02:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, 119 of last 225 edits have been vandalism by Runtshit sockpuppets, or reversion..RolandR 01:24, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - maybe this might cool things off a bit. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 01:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, 64 of last 86 edits have been Runtshit vandalism and reversion.RolandR 01:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. — Malcolm (talk) 01:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    So how much is "enough"? All twelve edits this month have been vandalism or reversion. RolandR 01:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    User:DoubleCross (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection +expiry 1 month, Semi-protection: Vandalism, This page is frequently being vandalized by various IP's and should be protected as I am constantly reverting it..Wikidudeman (talk) 00:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected ~ Riana ⁂ 00:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, 44 of last 64 edits have been Runtshit vandalism or reversion.RolandR 00:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ~ Riana ⁂ 00:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, 68 of last 132 edits have been vandalism by Runtshit sockpuppets, or reversion.RolandR 00:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ~ Riana ⁂ 00:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, 84 of last 92 edits have been vandalism by Runtshit sockpuppets, or reversion. .RolandR 00:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected with no set expiry ~ Riana ⁂ 00:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, 176 of last 331 edits have been Runtshit vandalism or reversion, and there has been other, unrelated vandalism..RolandR 00:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected with no set expiry ~ Riana ⁂ 00:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    full protection in edit -23:10, 10 September 2007 151.33.95.148 (Talk) (15,327 bytes) (→Events of 1943)-: long edit warring and disruption for impossible agreement. Unlogged for technical problem PIO 00:29, 11 September 2007

    Admins are not allowed to protect on a specific edit; see meta:The Wrong Version. Also, they cannot protect a specific section from editing (as it looks like you're asking them to); they can only protect the whole article. -Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 00:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Fully protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ~ Riana ⁂ 00:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Fully protected! Please, who knows what they could put there! Actually, it’s your descision. If you think the page’s protection needs an expiration date. Then let your voice be heard!:)--Angel David 00:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Full protection is used for disputes, I see none. ~ Riana ⁂ 00:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, 22 of last 42 edits have been Runtshit vandalism or reversion.RolandR 00:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected with no set expiry ~ Riana ⁂ 00:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, Frequent target of Runtshit vandal; 73 of last 121 edits have been vandalism or reversion.RolandR 00:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected with no set expiry ~ Riana ⁂ 00:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection +expiry 1 day, Semi-protection: Vandalism, Page has been vandalised every couple of hours by IPs, request proection until after media attention has died down.-Toon05 00:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ~ Riana ⁂ 00:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, Frequent target of Runtshit vandal; 28 of the last 31 edits have been vandalism or reversion..RolandR 23:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected with no set expiry ~ Riana ⁂ 00:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi. Vandalism from many ips, request protection for a week Surfeited 23:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected bibliomaniac15 15 years of trouble and general madness 00:25, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection Semi-protection: Vandalism, Protect because of high levels of anon vandalism. .Thedjatclubrock :) (T/C) 23:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. by User:Academic Challenger. bibliomaniac15 15 years of trouble and general madness 00:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Grandmastergalvatron (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    I am requesting indefinite semi protection of my user page because of vandal problems. A long time ago there was thins one vandal who persisted on British spellings in articles. Per guidelines, the American spellings were used as the articles started with those. Ever since then, he's been attacking me and other users and articles by adding loads of stupid comments and changing pages. He's been blocked like 100 times but appears to have a dynamic IP address. The RC partollers are helping, but not enough, and I'm personally tired of it. No matter the decision, thanks for reading.GrandMasterGalvatron 23:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Mr.Z-man 23:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi. Regular IP vandalism, with very few constructive edits coming from IP addresses. Johnfos 22:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect for 3 days Check the history, sockpuppeteer. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Protect. IP vandalism on the rise, most edits in the last 2 weeks. Figarema |Talk 22:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Acalamari 22:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    User:JetLover (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Semi protect for a week User:Naius socks and a vandal with a dynamic IP are out for blood. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi. Ongoing IP vandalism due to the fact that the page has been proposed for deletion.The IP addresses deny to participate in the discussion so they keep removing the deletion tag. Sergiogr 21:02, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

    Declined. Technically, users are allowed to remove a PROD tag from an article, although they should give a decent reason for doing so. The PROD process is only to be used for articles whose deletion is fairly uncontroversial. Obviously, there is a controversy here, so please do not restore the tag and instead take this article to Articles for Deletion. Thanks, Satori Son 21:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Southern California InFocus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    protect. Edit warring, esp. drive-by reverts by users who refuse to participate in discussion or whose participation is limited to cryptic non-sequiturs. csloat 19:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi. Ongoing multiple IP vandalism. • Lawrence Cohen 18:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    While dialoguing at Talk:Asana‎ on the correct word for the article and what should be the plural form of asana, User:Empacher cited from telephone calls and gives a list, which does not reflect the claims he makes. After disclosing this, he has been making edits to the article Asana, by roughly erasing pieces of the article. These are important parts, in which he erases for instance parts of Dharma Mittra, which is a leading yogi. This is not a serious user that tries to develop Wikipedia. I.e. he brought up Mittra, when he needed him to support his claim. Later he erases great parts of the article. Can he please be held off the article? Davin7 17:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection +expiry 1 week, Semi-protection: Vandalism, A lot of vandalism in just 1 day, I can see it getting worse as Sarah Silverman made some comments about Britney Spears at the MTV Music Awards last night, that seemed to have caused a lot of "pro-Britney" users to vandalise this article. A week or less of semi protection for people to cool down a bit..Ryan4314 16:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • Was coming here to request the same thing. I suggest it be semid for a longer period of time - perhaps 2 weeks. Eusebeus 17:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    2008 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism, and it has been getting much worse over the past week or two. I am not sure what an appropriate length would be for this protectionFrank Anchor 02:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Some good edits coming through from anons, don't want to filter those out. I'll put it on my watchlist to help out with the vandalism ~ Riana ⁂ 06:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for unprotection

    Shortcuts

    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.

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

    unprotect. protected in June to stop edit-warring. Doldrums 10:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    unprotection +expiry 1 week, Unprotection, Lots of vandal by IP users..DogGunn 04:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    unprotection +expiry 1 week, Unprotection, New images, lots of vandalism..DogGunn 04:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Race and ancient Egypt (controversies) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Protected since August 24, almost 2 weeks and four days ago. The discussion is stale. Muntuwandi 04:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Protected since August 4; the last instance of vandalism was August 24. --Andrewlp1991 04:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:CongBio (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    I know it's high risk. That's absolutely true. However, can't it be opened up to semi-protection? I'd really love to be able to edit this template I created, but I'm not ready to apply for administatorship.—Markles 00:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined - Used on almost 10,000 articles. If you want a change made (and there isn't much to change), use {{editprotected}}. Mr.Z-man 02:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Jeff Garlin (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

    It's not possible to propose page changes without at least semi-protection: while I see why Jeff Garlin is protected temporarily, I don't really understand why users shouldn't be allowed to access the talk page.

    Already unprotected. (Changed to semi). Mr.Z-man 04:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Stale protection, protected since May, no discussion since May. Studerby 09:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for significant edits to a protected page

    Shortcut

    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.

    Nobody's Daughter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect. I've been in contact with the manager of Courtney Love's website and myspace page, and he would like certain inaccurate sections of the article regarding her new album, Nobody's Daughter, removed, including the image which has been posted as the album cover. This album cover has not been released yet and much of the track information is false. Matthewbdunn 01:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Template:Film (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    I've been doing some major overhauling to the template, which was cut/pasted from a prototype on my user space to the template article. Unfortunately, there are still some minor bugs that need to be resolved, and it's difficult for me to get admins to make my requested changes. I'd like to request a temporary downgrade to semi-protection for one week in order to allow me to implement needed edits. Many thanks, Girolamo Savonarola 22:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected - just re-request here or contact me directly and I'll move it back up to full protection. Thanks for your work on the template. - Philippe | Talk 22:51, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Godzilla: Unleashed (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    An editor seems to have flown in to remove sourced content without explanation right before the article was protected. This was unrelated to the edit war that got it protected in the first place. The edits started right here. 21:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

    Would someone please to restore the content? Just64helpin 23:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Done WjBscribe 01:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Just what the hell is going on here? Why is this page protected from recreation? This is a damn good redirect to List of Pokémon Anime Films, but I can't do anything about this since the page is protected from recreation, yet I see nothing in the log. TheBlazikenMaster 10:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Unprotected - I think that's a very valid point, especially given the page has actually never been created. If it becomes a problem later, we can deal with it in other ways - Alison ☺ 12:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I went ahead and created that redirect.--Chaser - T 17:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Immigration to Australia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    I am attempting to add useful and accurate information to this page, including links to relevant legislation and comparisons to other jurisdictions. I request that the entry be reverted to my last edit, or some reasonable variation. jbdelaporte 23:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined - we're not going to revert to a previous version, which would have us taking part in an edit war. You may use the {{editprotected}} tag on the article talk page, with your suggested changes, and we can evaluate whether to make those changes on your behalf. - Philippe | Talk 23:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I find this very confusing. I thought the instructions were to only use the tag for a minor edit.jbdelaporte 00:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    At Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR‎ I asked for a large number of reversions in content disputes by the user Francis Tyers. The article were protected by all the Wiki users in last variant reverted by Francis Tyers. Some parts of reverts even arent explained in the talk page! For example he never explains why he readded "large number" term, deleted <fact> tag despite no citations from the HRW and Memorial Human Rights Center provided etc (he tried to explain only why he deleted some links which he marks as "hysteric"). I request that the entry be reverted to the last edit by Pocopocopocopoco or some reasonable variation. Andranikpasha 10:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined, Should discuss this on the article talk page. Navou banter 13:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fulfilled/denied requests

    J. K. Rowling (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protect. There seems to be a consistent amount of IP vandalism. Eagle Owl 16:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 6 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. IP vandalism was significant and ongoing, while constructive IP edits were virtually non-existent. Article has been semi-protected three times in last four months, most recently for four weeks. -- Satori Son 17:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect: This page is a vandalism magnet that requires repeated reverts several times a day. Very few of the resulting edits are beneficial to the page. Mu understanding is that the FA'd Earth page has been semi-protected several times already, without alleviating the vandalism. Please consider an indefinite semi-protection status. Thank you. — RJH (talk) 15:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 8 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.; complete lack of productive IP edits. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Rock of Love with Bret Michaels (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protect: IPs constantly adding unverified information and testing the table when the consensus has been reached to format the table in the current state. Miranda 15:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Many good edits coming through from anons, don't want to filter those out. ~ Riana ⁂ 15:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The IPs can sign up for an account. Also, there is unverified information being constantly inserted into the article. For example, episode 12 which hasn't even aired yet has a full summary. You can revert the unverified information, because this article isn't worth my time anymore since most of the information is unverified. Miranda 15:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    We can't force anyone to sign up for accounts. I am under no obligation to revert something because you feel it isn't 'worth your time'. Leaving for another admin's review. ~ Riana ⁂ 15:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protect: Persistent vandalism over 2 months by different anon IPs. Thanks. hike395 14:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ~ Riana ⁂ 15:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Hurricane Felix (2007) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect: Constant vandalism by IPs. -- LaNicoya  •Talk•  12:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Relatively low amount of vandalism, considering its on the main page. --DarkFalls talk 12:55, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    semi-protection +expiry 1 week, Unprotection, Heavy IP vandalism.Blueboy96 12:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected --DarkFalls talk 12:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Aspley State High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    This page has come under a lot of vandelisim in recent weeks. Can we get this page protected from Non Regestered Users and Newly Created Accounts?

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 11:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    full-protect: An escalating IP edit war involving clear vandalism in the form of deletions of sourced content. One registered editor stepped in and reverted a couple of the edits but really it seems to me that the best solution would be to revert all edits back to and including the latest outbreak on September 5th and give the article full-protection as this type of thing has occurred before. Other related articles that have been affected, at least by related 'spamming', in the past are Arthur Janov, Scream therapy, and The Primal Scream. Since I plugged some 'leaks' in those articles the attack has shifted back to where it began. GrahameKing 07:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Just warn and revert the POV edits and spamming. No need for protection as yet. --DarkFalls talk 09:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    Full protect. In order to stop edit war and bring certain editors to the discussion page who are not communicating. --Strothra 05:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected --DarkFalls talk 07:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    John F. Kennedy International Airport (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect Over the last few days, time referenced 16:44, 1 September 2007 to present (all times UTC), there has been an edit war with regard to an airline's right to transport passengers domestically vs internationally, but I'll spare the details. In short, according to WP:Airports and US travel rules, a domestic route can not be flown by an international carrier in which passengers are permitted to purchase a ticket only for that domestic flight. Anon editors have gone on the attack. Any break in the editing may cause these users to lose interest, therefore any assistance would be appreciated. Thank you. Neo16287 03:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - I see a content dispute here. Please try to find a solution to the issue on the talk page. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have put a topic on this issie on the talk page. Thanks! Bucs2004 19:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Seems to be a crazy unnoticed edit war/controversial dispute going on. Might need full protection until such issues can get settled on the talk page. -WarthogDemon 03:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Navou banter 03:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Miles "Tails" Prower (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    The page has come under too much vandalism from anons. so it should be protected so that only regestered users can edit. For proof of my statement, just go ahead and check it's edit history.

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I don't see much activity the last couple of days. Navou banter 03:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Serbia (1941-1944) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect. IP vandalism by sockpuppets of the banned User:Velebit. He now uses anon number code user names. He continually reposts tags for the page being biased or "totally disputed" or that it is "completely unreferenced" when it is referenced. Only this user finds bias in this article, in spite of every attempt possible in the past to reduce any such bias to a minimum. When users remove the now unneeded bias tag, "completely unrefenced and others, he responds by accusing the one who removed it for "vandalizing" the page. R-41 02:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Not a good deal of activity. Navou banter 03:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    Semi-protect. Vandalism from multiple IPs over the past few weeks. It's so tedious and annoying now Tjohnsond 02:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - please watchlist and revert. I know it's tedious, but we don't like to lock down articles until we have to. It's anti-wiki spirit (if you can say it in such a way). - Philippe | Talk 02:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protect'. Ongoing IP vandalism. Followed by reverts, generic vandalism on page request either protection or deletion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cholo

    Semi-protected Mr.Z-man 02:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=157134046"