Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive/2012/10

< Wikipedia:Requests for page protection | Archive | 2012
2012

29 October 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism. E4024 (talk) 12:23, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP editors and a newbie adding images of doubtful copyright info and editwarring. SMS Talk 11:01, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:37, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism by shifting IP. One bocked, One reported now DVdm (talk) 11:25, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Already protected by administrator Vsmith. (1 week) Armbrust The Homonculus 12:24, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Persistent vandalism – lots of vandalism . yes i am willing to seek consensus and i have read the edit warring policy (talk) 11:10, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ummmm, is this intended to be a serious request or a test edit? The Sandbox is never protected. It's intended for test edits, for people, even IPs to experiment. Protecting the sandbox would be like denying the right of anonymous users to edit Wikipedia. It'll never happen. Narutolovehinata5 t c csd new 11:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Declined Is it April 1st already? Narutolovehinata5 is right, we never protect the sandbox. There are actually some things that aren't allowed there - personal attacks, libel, and copyright violations, for instance - but we would deal with those by blocking rather than protection, if necessary. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and also BLP violations. Torreslfchero (talk) 08:09, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{RFPP|d}} This would be better handled by requesting a block of 115.241.251.112 (talk) at WP:AIV if they start vandalising again. I see that they have hopped IP addresses just once, yesterday, though - if they hop IPs again please make another request here. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 09:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The vandal started IP hopping, so I've blocked the latest IP and protected the page. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 12:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent attempts by unregistered user or users to delete any content which does not conform to their idea of the subject's ethnic identity. MisterCDE (talk) 08:23, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 09:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP disruption. Disruption involves the incorrect piping of internal links by a non-static IP. Article was semi-protected for 1 week beginning Oct. 16. Protection expired Oct. 23 and the disruption resumed Oct. 25. Suggest a longer period of semi-protection. IllaZilla (talk) 08:16, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 09:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: frequent vandalism. abg 07:22, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

  Declined Although it was protected yesterday for 24 hours, none of the edits since it was unprotected have been vandalism. Also, we almost never semi-protect indefinitely when the only previous protection has been for a short period of time. Feel free to request again if there is a significant amount of new vandalism, however. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 09:19, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: This FA-class article will appear on the Main Page on November 1st. There's just no need for IPs to trash it during its day of high visibility. Please semi-protect it until the 2nd. No disruptive editing so far but given the traffic the Main Page has it's better to be prepared. • Jesse V. (talk) 06:54, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined Articles are not preemptively protected, and FA's on the main page generally are not protected (except against page moves). · Andonic contact 08:00, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Number of BLP violations since news of complaint by Chelsea F.C. yesterday, as yet unproven or disproven. BigHairRef | Talk 19:49, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Already done. by Reaper Eternal--Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 20:28, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: It's because of the vandals working on my user page. Talk page RPP to follow. TruPepitoM Talk To Me 14:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(non-admin) I don't think it's necessary since the vandalized user has been blocked indefinitely. Torreslfchero (talk) 15:53, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Semi-protected · Andonic contact 20:46, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection Persistent sockpuppetry (e.g. [1], [2], [3]). Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:00, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 20:55, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, unexplained content removal, incorrect changes, unsourced changes, etc. last 3/4 dats. Dan56 (talk) 18:33, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 20:52, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

30 October 2012

Semi-protection: Multiple anon/new users Repeatedly adding a non-article "od, a winnipeg band" to this DAB page, ignoring advice on talk pages. Temporary semi-protection is the only thing to stop this disruption. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 03:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. · Andonic contact 03:44, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection For a reason multiple people is relating it to Hurricane Sandy. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!See terms and conditions. 03:01, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 03:22, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Oxfordwang (talk) 02:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Already protected. · Andonic contact 03:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism from multiple IPs in the 68, 92, 101, 96, 98, and 99 ranges. (All in the past 2 days). . ~Adjwilley (talk) 02:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 03:19, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP socks adding inconsequential and unsourced information to article. Nate • (chatter) 02:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 03:18, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Holy cow, this just came off a week of semi-protection and it's already been vandalized by a couple different IPs and a new user. I have no idea why this is such a vandal magnet, but I think we need longer protection this time. . ~Adjwilley (talk) 02:01, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 03:17, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term IP vandalism. -- Luke (Talk) 01:54, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. · Andonic contact 03:14, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – We are having a huge problem with vandalism on the page. Many users add their own names for some odd reason like this one individual from an unknown IP address called K. Gupta. This man also goes around changing I in references to lower case Ls so it is very hard to fix them. There is also abuse and homophobic comments being directed towards the star, Shahrukh Khan. Taking this into account, this account should be protected so only registered users and not any IP address can edit the tweets. There is also sockpuppety going on as user Ghajinidetails and Sanjeetbond are the same person and keep on adding promotional material to this website that many users like Arjaan and I have to delete. So please, help us out. Thank you. Ashermadan (talk) 01:49, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 03:13, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article is being repeatedly vandalized and/or blanked by changing IPs and new users. Apparently people like killing trees? . ~Adjwilley (talk) 01:19, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Seems to have stopped. · Andonic contact 03:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP-hopping edit warrior inserting unsourced POV content. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:24, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. · Andonic contact 03:09, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Insistent IP disruption. E4024 (talk) 23:48, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Most vandalism is from a single user, I've given them a level 4 warning, if he persists report to WP:AIV. · Andonic contact 03:09, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Long-term semi protection needed, given persistent sock puppetry. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 12:06, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Already protected. GedUK  12:27, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. -Anonymous editor is pushing his view on a years ago discussed issue to the article and refuses to discuss the issue at the talk page.Whiskey (talk) 09:33, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. -Anonymous editor is pushing his view on a years ago discussed issue to the article and refuses to discuss the issue at the talk page. (Related to the previous request.)Whiskey (talk) 09:33, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. -Anonymous editor is pushing his view on a years ago discussed issue to the article and refuses to discuss the issue at the talk page.(Related to the previous request.)Whiskey (talk) 09:33, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Someone is vandalizing this page with reasonably long edit history. Please protect this redirect. Thanks. Sriharsh1234 06:32, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected indefinitely. --Bongwarrior (talk) 06:58, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Possible socks (one established user and two new accounts) keep reinstating content that has no support on the talk page and is against MOS:FILM. I have initiated a sock investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rahmspeed, but I think it would be wise to fully protect the article until the sock investigation is concluded. Betty Logan (talk) 06:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 07:22, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection Mass persistent vandalism and requests for vandalism. Page is being used in someone's scavenger hunt and will be subject to persistent vandals until 3 November (end date of the hunt). Gateman1997 (talk) 05:13, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also if the talk page could be semi-protected as well that would be appreciated as that page has now come under attack. Gateman1997 (talk) 05:16, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Done, thank you. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:19, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WE ARE DOING GISHWHES. EDITING IT IS ONE OF THE ITEMS ON THE LIST. LEAVE THIS PAGE OPEN PLEASE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dilemmaemma (talk • contribs) 12:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And that's exactly why we won't. GedUK  13:01, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Jprg1966 (talk) 04:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined Blocked the users instead, they violated 3RR at least two or three times each even after having been warned. · Andonic contact 07:29, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

31 October 2012

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tomcat (7) 20:44, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected indefinitely. GedUK  20:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection. Persistent vandalism from dynamic IPs, usually inserting bogus ingredients. Article has had extended periods of protection before, but vandalism always returns after protection expires. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 18:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 3 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This article is not quite at the point where permanent protection is required. ‑Scottywong| squeal _ 20:40, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to create an athlete's page, but it looks like a music page was created before with the same name in 2008 but then deleted. I have the AFC ready and its located here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Brandon_Davis please let me know how I can proceed. XK8ER (talk) 22:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Not unprotected Normally requests like this are accepted, but first you need to prove that Davis passes WP:ATHLETE or WP:BIO. That isn't done in the current version, because none of the sources that you have cited satisfy the Wikipedia guideline on identifying reliable sources. I recommend reading WP:42 for a quick overview of what we're looking for. I've added a draft template to the top of your AFC page - what you need to do now is to add sources to the page to show that Davis is notable, and then follow the instructions on the template to submit your article for review. Best — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:49, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing IP hopper vandalism.  Mbinebri  talk ← 16:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.

Need some possibly longer term semi-protection against an IP in a Verizon pool who is repeatedly deleting a section about a polluting paper plant without comment. Mangoe (talk) 15:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. If that doesn't deter them, then we might need to use the edit filter to stop them. ‑Scottywong| confer _ 16:24, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism based on a dislike of WP:SPOILER information on the page. SchroCat (^ • @) 08:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disappointing: there are very, very few positive IPs and they are always free to use a {{Edit semi-protected}} template for further requests. It's 8.30 in the morning here and I've already used up two reverts to an ongoing issue that will only worsen once the US IP users come online again - and an issue based on the ignorance of the WP:SPOILER guideline. How bad does the situation have to get before there is even a fig leaf of protection for the page? - SchroCat (^ • @) 08:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP edit-warring with multiple IPs. nableezy - 15:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC) 15:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:49, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Halo 4 article is protected, but not all of the templates in use on the page are, and a user (User:Fatsuitx) has twice vandalised the page by adding his own user page to the unprotected templates, making it hard for non-technically-minded users to either read or edit the page. While the user in question has been blocked, others seeking to vandalise the Halo 4 page could easily do something similar. Ajhoughton (talk) 12:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined If this vandalism was more recent I might be persuaded to protect, as it affects 49 different pages, not just the Halo 4 article. However, it is now a few days old, and we don't usually protect pages preemptively. (That is, unless they are "highly visible templates" - but I don't think this template quite reaches the threshold of high visibility.) Feel free to re-report if there is more vandalism. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Halo 4 article is protected, but not all of the templates in use on the page are, and a user (User:Fatsuitx) has twice vandalised the page by adding his own user page to the unprotected templates, making it hard for non-technically-minded users to either read or edit the page. While the user in question has been blocked, others seeking to vandalise the Halo 4 page could easily do something similar. Ajhoughton (talk) 12:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined No vandalism edits, and not visible enough to count as a "highly visible template". — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:30, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Frequent vandalisms and unsourced (incorrect) edits lately. Would rather not protect myself since I'm actively editing the article. – Steel 14:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. There has been quite a lot of vandalism on the article long-term, but also quite a few good edits from IPs. I'm guessing that the recent vandalism/unsourced edit spurt is due to the recent release of a new Android version, so I've only protected for a week. If the vandalism continues after that, though, I think a longer period of semi-protection would be a good idea. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 15:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair. Thanks. – Steel 15:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit warring and likely sock puppetry. Biker Biker (talk) 07:54, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined Declining for now, as it would probably be better to take action against the user rather than protect the whole thing. I think the IP is him editing while logged out, and I'm going to AGF and assume that's accidental. Relist if others start getting involved. GedUK  12:54, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kidz Bop 2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 3 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 4 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 5 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 6 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 7 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 8 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 9 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 10 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 11 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 12 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 13 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 14 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 15 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 16 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 17 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 18 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 19 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 20 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 21 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Kidz Bop 22 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – REPEAT REQUEST. IP is adding unsourced sections about a second CD that conflicts with other sources provided. Also remove header what makes provider-dependent bonus-tracks to normal tracks. IP is now also massively introducing links to disambiguationpages.
The same applies to Kidz Bop 2, Kidz Bop 3, Kidz Bop 4, Kidz Bop 5, Kidz Bop 6, Kidz Bop 7, Kidz Bop 8, Kidz Bop 9, Kidz Bop 10, Kidz Bop 11, Kidz Bop 12, Kidz Bop 13, Kidz Bop 14, Kidz Bop 15, Kidz Bop 16, Kidz Bop 17, Kidz Bop 18, Kidz Bop 19, Kidz Bop 20, Kidz Bop 21 and Kidz Bop 22. User was blocked on 21/10/2012, so protection was denied. User was blocked again, now for a week, on 23/10/2012. But now the block has expired and the vandal is back... The Banner talk 07:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  User(s) blocked. He's already been blocked for a month. I'm loathe to protect 25 articles to keep one IP out unless it's absolutely necessary. GedUK  12:48, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

semi-protection. Repeated recreation of this article against AFD consensus by multiple IP editors. Also the talk page due to repeated removal of relevent tags re the afd (eg [4]). duffbeerforme (talk) 13:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I haven't protected the talk page, but it might be warranted if there is more disruption there. I've put it on my watchlist. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 14:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated addition of a screed based on a "reliable" blog.[5] There may be reason to include some of this, per WEIGHT in RSs, but it needs discussion. — kwami (talk) 12:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 13:45, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per WormThatTurned's request to make it available to all. But when this is processed, I'd consider for CSD in my Public talk page. TruPepitoMTalk To Me 12:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User request within own user space. Sriharsh1234 11:40, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Done Materialscientist (talk) 11:41, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated insertion of copyright violating material by IP-hopper. . Biker Biker (talk) 07:26, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs repeatedly removing directions and timings, as per a request made by one of the volunteers User:Rohini on my talk page. --. Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:19, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User request within own user space. GSK ● talk ● contribs 05:31, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Done Materialscientist (talk) 05:36, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User request within own user space. GSK ● talk ● contribs 05:30, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Done Materialscientist (talk) 05:36, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP spamming redlink/website against the general list and Talk page consensus. Tried warnings but IP keeps changing. Wyatt Riot (talk) 05:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Consistent IP "vandalism". Shadow (talk) 04:51, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:38, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Stupid edit war over overlinking. I'm barely involved, but enough that it would be best for me to stay out of it as an admin. I just warned User:InedibleHulk about edit warring on this page last week and now he's back at it again. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 03:18, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Fully protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:27, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected: High number of edits due to GISHWHES task 86.179.249.185 (talk) 17:27, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Not unprotected Please talk to the admin who recently protected this page (User talk:Bongwarrior). ‑Scottywong| gossip _ 18:07, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)   Declined We won't enable your vandalism. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:08, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism (and new accounts messing up things they don't understand), including this and this indication of off-site organization for vandalism of the article. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 02:11, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Lots of disruption from multiple IP addresses. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 00:30, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:48, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Indefinite semi-protection: The vandals will vandalize my page in the future. I am applying for RPP to deny their recognition. TruPepitoMTalk To Me 23:48, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined, User talk pages are not protected except in response to extreme disruption. And even then, only for brief periods. IP users may have something they wish to communicate to you so such pages should remain editable. Rjd0060 (talk) 00:12, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Persistent vandalism – Removal of information with reliable sources and added unreliable information by mostly unregistered users and some by registered users in recent past. Direct copy paste some info. from some websites. NO neutral point of view and Manual of style among others. Disruptive editing. thanks. Theman244 (talk) 22:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First should be Temporary full protection: by mistake i clicked the Indefinite. Mass change to the genre. Thanks Theman244 (talk) 23:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. · Andonic contact 02:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Soerfm (talk) 22:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editor(s) are repeatingly adding advertising links. See here , here and here for examples. Cyclopiatalk 22:34, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of four days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IPs and unconfirmed users have been adding unreferenced and redundant information since the release window was announced earlier today. GSK ● talk ● contribs 22:11, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:12, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – For some strange reason, this page has been a target for IP vandals. TJRC (talk) 20:55, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Done by Reaper Eternal. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:27, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP revert warring for the past few days, same for Polish–Soviet War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 20:53, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Note: . I semi-protected Polish-Russian War for 1 week and Polish-Soviet War for 3 days (less activity).--Bbb23 (talk) 00:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Ongoing IP vandalism, bordering on edit warring, despite requests to go to the talk page. SchroCat (^ • @) 20:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. · Andonic contact 02:16, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection Persistent sockpuppetry. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 18:58, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined Don't see any sockpuppetry (unless I'm missing something?), only an IP who has been blocked. · Andonic contact 02:07, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. I feel as though the article should either be deleted or protected. Junebea1 (talk) 18:13, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:58, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Lots of IPs and new users making nonconstructive edits to this dab page. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 14:40, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Based on continuing editing of over 30 edits over the past hour, and the content that was being added, I changed it back from a disambiguation page to a redirect like it was a month ago. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 14:55, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  Done That seems to have done the trick, good call. · Andonic contact 17:57, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi Protection - Mass vandalism (ie Superstorm sandy) recently edit conflicts are too much to handle the amount comming in - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:05, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined Not really seeing that much vandalism, and there are several IP's making good contributions. There certainly are tons of edits happening on the page at the moment, but that's not a reason to semi-protect it. If the vandalism ramps up, feel free to submit another request and we'll take another look at it. ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 18:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the vandalism is comming from Canal419 who has already been warned twice (Once by me). - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:14, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi or Full-protection: A disambiguation page in which almost every edit is vandalism or reverting it, new users and IPs, with what appears to be a very long history. Also, as this article is only a disambiguation page, unless other articles are added with a relevant title, the page has no potential to improve with edits over time, vandalism or legitimate. Even if the page didn't have a history of vandalism, the title itself is a vandalism magnet. I see no reason why this page shouldn't be fully protected, as stated before, it appears to have no improvement potential even for users with 10+ edits. If a reorganization or addition of a new article is necessary, an admin can do that. --██████ 00:45, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined · Andonic contact 02:05, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Archive/2012/10&oldid=1144945523"