Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Yahel Guhan (talk | contribs) at 06:32, 16 September 2007 (→‎Current requests for protection). 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.

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

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. SefringleTalk 06:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:How to edit a page (edit | [[Talk:Wikipedia:How to edit a page|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection Hourly vandalism from randoms with no end in sight. The page very seldom needs to be edited. Richard001 06:02, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Full protection edit warring. SefringleTalk 05:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    Semi-protection - IP vandalism and uncited material added in wake of death rumours. WATP (talk) • (contribs) 20:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Increased request to Full-protection. Mostly good-faith edits but while his death has not been confirmed, there have been plenty of instances of people referring to his "death". Ought to be protected until any official statements. Readro 22:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. Sam Blacketer 22:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Protection has been removed with the reason that McRae has been confirmed dead; this is not the case at the current time, and confirmation will likely not occur until well into the 16th. Please restore this protection, ASAP if possible. —Neuropedia 05:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    After the unprotection, everyone has seemed to agree that his death is confirmed well enough (by his brother and his agent and published in reliable sources) except for you. We do not need an official police report on it. Do not start an edit war. Prolog 05:20, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The police have still to verify who was on the helicopter when it crashed, and all major news sources are stating that it is "believed" and "thought" that he was the pilot. It seems unfair to present unverified information as fact at this point. — Neuropedia 05:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Salt - page has been recreated 12 times..The Evil Spartan 04:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

     Done the earth of this image is full of salt. --wL<speak·check> 04:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protect. This is getting daily edits from an IP that are very much in contravention of WP:BLP. Normally, I wouldn't ask for semi-protection for the amount of vandalism that's occurring, if it weren't for the nature of those edits. — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 04:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Naruto episodes (Seasons 3-4) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect. There's a full IP edit war going on about air dates, and this is getting in the way of managing the page; one particular bit of vandalism lasted ten revisions without being noticed. Full protection stops User edit wars, so I suppose Semiprotection can be used to stop IP edit wars, right? You Can't Review Me!!! 03:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

     Done expires until September 19, 2007 --wL<speak·check> 03:49, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    List of characters in Camp Lazlo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    full protection Full protection: Dispute, Edit war. A registered editor is adding disputed material to the article, and is not open to discussion. I've tried at least three times to open discussion, but there's been no response, even tho edit history shows activity after my posts on both the user talk and article talk page. Appears that the registered editor has also logged off and is using IP now. Requesting full protection until the editors can come to an understanding. .Yngvarr (t) (c) 03:07, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected --DarkFalls talk 03:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Iglesia ni Cristo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect for at least two weeks. There has been an anti-Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC) POV pusher who to posts false negative information of an exaggerated nature (INC ministers shooting innocent people), while citing user-created Newsvine articles. Each edit comes from a newly created account. This user continues to edit war over these edits, despite warnings. These new accounts are all possibly sockpuppets of Mclao (talk · contribs) wL<speak·check> 02:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --DarkFalls talk 03:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection and/or salt Article has being deleted and recreated at least 4 times, and recently a CSD tagging for the 5th time in less then a few hours.--JForget 02:40, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Creation protected --DarkFalls talk 03:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Negima!? (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection for 2 months Massive vandalism again. This article is known for being vandalized massively many times and this newest wave happened four days after expiration of last semi-protection. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 02:25, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --wL<speak·check> 03:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection due to disruption by blocked user--JForget 01:25, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. WjBscribe 01:27, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    full protection Full protection: Dispute.The Evil Spartan 01:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protectedProtected for three days. I'll look over at it then to see if progress has been made. Maxim(talk) 01:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection +expiry 1 week, Semi-Protection, I hesitate to call it vandalism, but there's been quite a few POV edits to this page by an IP and two probably sockpuppets. I think it'd be good to block edits from new users and IP's..Into The Fray T/C 00:46, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    If anything, it ought only to be semiprotected to avoid sockpuppets. There is no real edit dispute, except for some sockpuppeteering to add some heavily WP:WEASELish comments. The Evil Spartan 01:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, changed my request above as a result. Sorry, that was what I asked Twinkle to do, but not what I got. Into The Fray T/C 01:04, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - watchlist and revert please. We don't pre-emptively protect. - Philippe | Talk 01:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Full protection. Edit/revert wars, Talk page disintegrating into insults, e.g "If you're going to be anal..." Important topic. Bsharvy 12:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected Phaedriel - 23:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems the page is in need of protection because of only one user; there is a concensus on the page but as a whole people wishing to move on with the page were told that User:Bsharvy's consent was needed...i.e. progress is being blocked by a single user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allgoodnamesalreadytaken (talk • contribs) 01:05, 16 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.

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

    Semi-protected on Aug 27; it's been awhile now, so let's try unprotection. Sdedeo (tips) 23:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined - it's just sprotection, and this is an OTRS case. I'd prefer to leave sprotection active. - Philippe | Talk 23:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Philippe -- what is OTRS? Sdedeo (tips) 00:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Sdedeo - OTRS is the email system used by the Wikimedia Foundation to track incoming emails requesting Foundation assistance on something. Generally it's used in WP:BLP or copyright issues. Some en:admins have access to OTRS to handle these issues, and when OTRS is involved, most of the rest of us prefer to let the Foundation (or the OTRS admins) deal with any issues. Since there's an open OTRS ticket, you can be assured that the Foundation is watching this one. - Philippe | Talk 01:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, I see, and I see it was noted in the logs. Thanks Philippe! Sdedeo (tips) 01:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem, and please let me know if I can be of any further help. Thanks for watching the 'pedia - your efforts are appreciated. - Philippe | Talk 01:53, 16 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.

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

    Please replace this template with the code found in User:FunPika/Drafts/Notability per WP:TS. FunPika 13:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Done Maxim(talk) 15:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    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]

    Declined I have no way of verifying what you said is true or not. They should contact OTRS instead. Mr.Z-man 00:54, 12 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

    1 vs. 100 (Philippine game show) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection. Despite the warning posted, various anons (172.188.109.96 (talk · contribs), 172.141.30.59 (talk · contribs), 172.159.115.141 (talk · contribs), 172.214.95.28 (talk · contribs), and 172.215.132.171 (talk · contribs)), which I believe to be the same person, have ignored it and have been making unnecessary edits to the article. What he's doing is already annoying, albeit not disruptive. Please respond ASAP and don't decline this request because this has been going on almost every night for a week now. Also, I know giving a warning would be useless at this point. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 17:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined The problem is that its only happening once a day. See Wikipedia:Protection policy#Semi-protection "Preventing vandalism when blocking users individually is not a feasible option, such as a high rate of vandalism from a wide range of anonymous IP addresses." - Once a day is not a high rate and some IPs seem to be making positive contributions. Mr.Z-man 17:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Then block every address from the 172 range then. It's already annoying even though it's once a day. It's already a problem for us editing the said article. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 17:56, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Replied on user's talk page. Mr.Z-man 23:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    semi-protection +expiry 1 week, Semi-protection: Vandalism, This page is being ruthlessly vandalized all of a sudden. This event has caused it to be the most edited page on www.wikirage.com. .Grim-Gym 22:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Today's featured article per WP:NOPRO. It'll all stop in about one hour. -- zzuuzz (talk) 22:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. -- Alan Liefting talk 20:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.. If it gets worse, feel free to request protection again. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Ontario general election, 2007 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Semi-protection. IPs adding incorrect data in multiple edits - this recent round hasn't been the first problem. It's really a pain to have to go back and fact-check all of these edits being made. Morgan695 16:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected Phaedriel - 23:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Adam's Bridge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    Semi-protection Regular and long-term vandalism by IPs (including using open proxies/zombie computers such as 159.148.225.11 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)), changing article lead etc, without discussion on talk page. Abecedare 19:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Done, but's it's a full protection for 3 days as there is an obvious editing dispute, and yes, I protected the wrong version, I can't really help it nor can I revert and protect, which is an abuse of admin powers. Maxim(talk) 19:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Semi-protection Maybe 6 hours or so, until it gets off the front page of DIGG ChrisPikula 18:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined Not enough recent vandalism to justify protection. There's only one anon that's vandalising. Maxim(talk) 19:22, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    User:JavaDog/public_key (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Full-protection To protect the integrity of a public-key.

    Done -Royalguard11(T·R!) 18:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    semi-protection +expiry 6 hours, Semi-protection: Vandalism, repeated blanking of page and redirecting to Member of Provincial Parliament by unregistered user.carelesshx talk 16:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Mr.Z-man 18:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    I was referred here by the admin who protected the page. Currently there is no edit war going on (somewhat unusual for this article, admittedly). There is a dispute over the inclusion of some images, which has resulted in a handful of reversions over the last few days, however nothing disruptive. The image issue is not going to be resolved by this protection (if anything it has been inflamed by it), and simply stops legitimate editors working on the text. --Michael Johnson 01:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Done. Note that the article was semi-protected before full protection was issued, so I've returned to that protection level, instead of unprotecting altogether. Also notice that, in case this matter escalates into an edit war instead of just a couple of reversions, there will be no choice but to summarily lock it down again. Phaedriel - 13:56, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    User talk:86.10.194.199 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

    semi-protection. IP vandal who changed their "block" notice to read "3 hours" instead of the "99 hours" block that was issued. — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 16:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined - the block holds, and the behaviour in question isn't sufficiently disruptive, in my opinion. (See also: WP:RBI) Nihiltres(t.l) 16:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    Full protection - User:Thrillmecd is persistently edit warring in this article with this name and several IPs, and is not responding to any warnings or blocks, and is making no attempts at constructive communication despite several invitations to do so. His last edit summary says he's going to keep edit warring. Crystallina 03:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Phaedriel - 12:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    NOTE: thrillmecd is the copyright holder of everything related to THRILL ME, including the complete synopsis which he has provided (and ANY deletions or changes to his copyrighted synopsis consitutes COPYRIGHT VILOATION), also thrillmecd is the owner and copyright holder of the photographs he has provided to wikipedia to illustrate the page. This THRILL ME page has remained fairly consistent for nearly a year, with contributions of several editors. NOW, for some reason, people unfamiliar with THRILL ME are constantly changing the COPYRIGHT SYNOPSIS (by deleteing a portion of it) and remdering the page incomplete and full of inccorect information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.44.253.183 (talk) 15:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    NOTE) I notice a similar mannerism of speech on User talk:Thrillmecd, and looking at the history I think we have evidence of IP sockpuppetry here. Make of it what you will, but I call incivility. JACO, Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 05:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    semi-protection +expiry 1 day, Semi-protection: Vandalism, Vandalism by anons, possibly same person w/ changing IP.—Ignatzmicetalkcontribs 13:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected. by Zzuuzz. Phaedriel - 13:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Wirral Grammar School for Boys (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    semi-protect. Significant and repeated vandalism from new users and anonymous IPs, quite possibly from students at the school. Ringbark 13:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Phaedriel - 13:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

    Full protection Content dispute. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 03:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Phaedriel - 13:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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

    Semi-protect. Frequent 300-related vandalism by anons: insertion of "Sparta" into the dab list, redirecting the page to "Sparta", etc. WarpstarRider 09:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Phaedriel - 12:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=158223748"