Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive/2013/01

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2013

01 January 2013

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – from "MORE" vandalism and/or unsourced/false info. Digifan23 (talk) 20:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Persistent adding of unsourced content on BLPs by IPs. Musdan77 (talk) 20:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:37, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Vandalism from IP-hopping editor. Also request semi-protection for Resident Evil 4 and Resident Evil 6. See related ANI discussion, after which there has been additional vandalism. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 18:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week., after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The Resident Evil pages have been left alone for about two days, and they were only touched once or twice, so I'll hold off on protecting those. Airplaneman ✈ 20:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent Semi-protection: Intermittent IP vandalism. This article suffers from persistent intermittent IP vandalism. I am getting increasingly fed-up of IP vandals putting "Nazi", "fascist" "BNP" and other nonsense on this article. I feel Permanent semi-protection will put a stop to this once and for all. This has been going on for over 2 years. Thank you Christian1985 (talk) 19:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this, whilst I'm no fan of the Daily Mail myself the article gets hit frequently with vandals, has a long history of protection and the last vandalism related semi-prot was for a year. Very few if any non-confirmed edits are building the article and it's not as if the vandalism will decline over time. tutterMouse (talk) 19:30, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected. Courcelles 20:06, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefine semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. I'm asking for indefinite protection for the 4th time at least already. There was a gap after it was protected for 1 month in November simply because I removed it from my watchlist. Just protect it indefinitely, nothing else will help. --Moscow Connection (talk) 17:56, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'm inclined not to indefinitely protect it just yet. Airplaneman ✈ 20:10, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: or maybe temporary full protection (as the users will wait to become confirmed...). This page is "enjoying" quite a lot of link placement in a number of forms recently and the edits have been reverted by a number of users (IPs too). Thanks. Herby talk thyme 15:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – user warned instead. KTC (talk) 15:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rather more than one user's edits that are the issue but no matter. --Herby talk thyme 16:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect from IP vandalism until transfer window shuts at the beginning of February. JMHamo (talk) 16:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 17:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Silly kids playing games. Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I'm not seeing a reason for protection. The only recent bout of dubious edits (that could hardly be considered vandalism) were made by ProfAndrewJoy (talk · contribs). Those look like test edits. There's not too much else going on. Airplaneman ✈ 10:42, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: The dispute was about a certain issue and from what I see they already resolved it on the talk page. Due to the fact it's protected we can't add information to the article. I want to add harmless references! Guitar hero on the roof (talk) 10:23, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can place {{Edit protected}} on the talk page to request a non-controversial edit to be made. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:44, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, The dispute seems to be onging. An "editprotected" request seems in order. Airplaneman ✈ 11:00, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High visibility page, vandalism magnet, blp prudence, standard practice. --My76Strat (talk) 11:33, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 12:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 09:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 10:55, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Despite repeated semi-protections in the past, an uncooperative IP hopping user repeatedly adds an unreliable blog source to Agneepath (2012 film). . smarojit (buzz me) 07:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was semi-protected a few days earlier for a period of 7 days or so. --smarojit (buzz me) 07:13, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please semi-protect this page indefinitely. This page was protected 3 times but as soon as the protection expires, the IP continues to add the blog sources to good articles. Forgot to put name 09:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 10:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – vandalism returned almost immeditely after previous semi expired. There is nothing worthwhile that I can find to warrant PC. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 10:37, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent disruptive edits and vandalism. Started from 1 until now. Even after the disruptive accounts blocked, IP user(s) does/do the same unconstructive edits. So I think it's better to protect this article and edit feature will be available for only auto-confirmed users for a temporary short period of time (3-7 days). Please check revision history. Zheek (talk) 06:29, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 10:49, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. - Happysailor (Talk) 05:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 10:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Highly visible template with 442 transclusions. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Airplaneman ✈ 10:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated good-faith edits that are factually inaccurate and/or disruptive. . Nascar1996(Talk • Contribs) 23:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:30, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection or pending changes: Unsourced editing. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:29, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: it's coming and this will create a lot of editing wars, messy vandalism - Pending Changes is perfect for this. Mono 22:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 10:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Persistent multi-party edit-warring. Discussion ongoing, but largely ignored by some editors. Would be helpful to eliminate jockeying for position and tag-teaming so we can focus on discussion. ► Belchfire-TALK 05:31, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected.. (for the bot, who won't archive without the template being somewhere under the section header) Courcelles 06:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term vandalism and high risk page. Vacationnine 04:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 06:27, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An IP address (12.73.206.112 ) is being used to post links to potentially defamatory websites in this article. A similar effort from the same IP is occurring at American Digger (TV series) - a website related to the subject of this BLP. Geoff Who, me? 19:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for three months. Another admin has protected the TV show article for a week. — Dianna (talk) 06:17, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Long-term protection As every year. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This request is urgent; vandalism has already begun for obvious reasons. Vacationnine 05:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected. Let's save some aggravation and just call it a year now. Courcelles 05:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – few watchers, virtually all edits vandalism. Falcon8765 (TALK) 07:56, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Please remove the pending changes from this page as it is already semi-protected. Forgot to put name 18:57, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It looks like to me, that the pending changes protection is set as indefinite and the semi expires on 24 January 2013. Don't think any one of them should be removed. Armbrust The Homunculus 03:50, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it protected indefinitely by pending changes? Forgot to put name 06:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How should I know. As the protecting admin. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not unprotected as the dual temporary semi-protection and indefinite pending changes was deliberate. KTC (talk) 21:51, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Skamecrazy123 (talk) 21:30, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Only from one specific IP who have been blocked. KTC (talk) 21:40, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A particular IP address (12.73.206.112 ) has been used recently to post links to potentially defamatory websites in what appears to be part of a cyberstalking effort. Geoff Who, me? 19:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone! I am from the french Wikipedia. We have an "attack" from users of this website. They are trying to add a death announcement on the article Cyril Lignac (and maybe other persons), and some of them are planning to come here, on the english Wikipedia (example). So I just wanna make sure that tou were informed of this, and maybe protect this article... Thanks and happy new year (and sorry if my english is bad...)! Woozz talk to me 18:31, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. KTC (talk) 21:45, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated vandalism and serious BLP issues. Suggest some of today's edits, if not all, are subject to revdel. . Biker Biker (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for 1 month. Will go through and revdel inappropriate BLP edit(s). KTC (talk) 18:48, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IPs (probably all the same person) adding unsourced claims of new company locations and "Company served its 1,000,000 customer on December 12, 2012" and such. Refuses to understand what a WP:RS is. This is a longstanding problem with this article. Based of the IPs' writing style and past experience I have no doubt that this is renewed socking by the president of the company. --CliffC (talk) 16:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. - Best, Mifter (talk) 20:11, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

02 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lova Falk talk 19:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism after recent protection has expired, and high risk page for obvious reasons. Temporary PC didn't stop anything, so going for indef here. Vacationnine 18:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for six months. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:32, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection: edit warring. Frietjes (talk) 19:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't see anyone stepping upto the D part of WP:BRD, that might be the better course of resolving this. tutterMouse (talk) 20:27, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any warring after this report. Spc21 has also kindly slapped an edit war warning template on Armbrust's talk page. If it continues, a protection is in order, but things seem to have cooled down the past 17 hours. Airplaneman ✈ 20:33, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, it seems like the edit warring has cooled off. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:16, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Unsourced transfer speculation. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – The current protection level allows edits to be reviewed and is leading to a lot of "pending" edits- most of which are still speculation . Murry1975 (talk) 15:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 17:10, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes protection: Persistent vandalism by IP POV-pushers. There are enough watchers that semi-protection would be overkill, but there's no reason to inflict the sometimes-corrupted versions on our readers. Huon (talk) 22:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agree. And frankly the wear and tear of almost going to the 3RR line, counting the reverts to make sure you did not cross it, etc. is an absolute frustration and a major source of wear and tear. That is what Pending changes was designed for really. History2007 (talk) 22:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Another user (Evanh2008) is now also supporting Pending changes for the page. History2007 (talk) 10:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 15:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. History2007 (talk) 16:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 13:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'm hesitant to protect for longer since it hasn't been protected at all recently. If vandalism continues upon expiry of the protection, let me know and I'll increase the time. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – the same BLP policy violations are back soon after a three month semi expired. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for one year. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP content blanking and unsourced edits from single purpose IP accounts originating from Denver, the home of the corporate headquarters of the subject of the article. One user, User:Nonstop111 has been blocked for making similar edits to these IP accounts. --Quartet 21:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC) ‎[reply]

  • I agree - this or Pending changes protection is needed. This page has been plagued by WP:COI edits from IP addresses and new accounts who's single purpose is to remove material from this article since late November. Types of edits include blanking of sourced material[1][2][3][4], addition of unsourced material, including advertising[5], as well overall corporate editing[6]. Invitations to discuss the edits on talk pages are met with more blanking.--Yankees76 Talk 13:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected. by User:Ohnoitsjamie for two months. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:12, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Removing station logo without giving a reason. Mbrstooge (talk) 21:27, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article was merged as a content fork a long time ago. All edits consist of the author resurrecting it and other editors reverting him. (I actually like it better than the version it's rd'd to, but we don't need two of them.) — kwami (talk) 06:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of unexplained content removal and unsourced edits from a single IP address. IP address seems to be working closely with the subject and article is written like a PR release without proper citation.

User(s) blocked: 36 hours (talk · contribs).. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:About/Archive 1 (edit | project page | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite semi-protection: Wikipedia talk:About/Archive 1 has had some IP and account editor's change talk page archive content and blank it with personal biographies. No reason and need for any IP addresses and new account users to make changes to a past discussions archive. TheGeneralUser (talk) 22:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Airplaneman ✈ 06:16, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Webclient101talk 05:31, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Pending-changes protected indefinitely. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:34, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: My UCI (User Committed Identity) hashcode, if a smart person were to change this, I may not be able to prove my identity to someone who had the power to unblock my account. Thanks. gwickwiretalkedits 02:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 03:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – article was vandalized several times by "corporate" ips removing negative info and turning it into a commercial. Maybe some patrollers adding it to their watchlist could be a sufficient protection, I don't know. Olybrius (talk) 01:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. KTC (talk) 01:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

03 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. John of Reading (talk) 19:15, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 19:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 17:17, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for six months. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 07:58, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. KTC (talk) 11:05, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Spam copyvio from sockpuppet spammer: see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/CSOWind and huge archive at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CSOWind/Archive. Altered Walter (talk) 15:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already done. for 1 year by GB fan. -- KTC (talk) 16:39, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: sworn in as 11th Governor of Puerto Rico but some sources are reporting him as 10th incorrectly. He is the 11th based on ordinarity but the 10th person to hold the post. We are having an influx of unregistered users and newcomers changing this back and forth. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 05:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Genre warring and removal of unsourced content.

BlastBeat4 (talk) 00:45, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Although I have added the page to my watch list to see if any further action will be needed. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 12:22, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Repeated additions of WP:NONFREE images. Last protection expired in February and the problem is persistent. Hekerui (talk) 18:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. KTC (talk) 16:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 09:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. KTC (talk) 11:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: just became the 10th Governor of Puerto Rico as his term ended but some sources are reporting his successor as 10th Governor incorrectly. Fortuño is the 10th based on ordinarity but the 9th person to hold the post. We are having an influx of unregistered users and newcomers changing this back and forth. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 05:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. KTC (talk) 10:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism recently, including section blanking, article blanking, removal of sourced content, et cetera. The subject is a political leader who made some controversial statements recently, is being sued and may be arrested as per latest news. Over the past few days, many times the sourced controversial statements have been deleted by IP users. Gmcssb (talk) 12:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IPs causing problems, as per my previous request which was declined.—Ryulong (琉竜) 11:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New additions by IPs or non-reviewer accounts, will have to be 'reviewed' (you're a reviewer) before they show. See WP:PC for more about pending changes. GedUK  14:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection Usual MO of IP kid's show vandalizers; creating false episodes or changing episode order to fit their own imaginary schedule. Long-time target, needs a block of two-four weeks. Nate • (chatter) 05:23, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Consistent high level of IP vandalism making the article unstable, suggest permanent semi-protection as applied at Lord Voldemort GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 10:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 12:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Minor edit war over gang rape of a 16 year old girl by the city's football team. Rawlangs (talk) 07:09, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 12:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent unsourced additions. STATic message me! 05:21, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – For obvious reasons. Vacationnine 21:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent efforts to change archive of a deletion discussion; there is also an associated sockpuppet case. . RayTalk 20:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – After the protection expired, IPs and unconfirmed users had been adding unsourced contents . Torreslfchero (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs in a narrow 62.* range have been hijacking this article for a while now. It has only just come off semi-protection and they've returned. Sitush (talk) 12:09, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See my recent comment at Talk:Ezhavathy#Recent_vandalism. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 12:11, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. SkyMachine (++) 10:58, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to point out that there isn't a "content dispute" but rather an anonymous IP reverting a redirect to Dwarf (Germanic mythology) over a long period of time. The anonymous IP refuses discussion but claims that it is "vandalism". :bloodofox: (talk) 11:21, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple IPs during this past week have either vandalized, or violated WP:BLP. -- MST☆R (Happy New Year!) 08:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Tradition dictates that we don't go indefinite yet. Favonian (talk) 10:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High level of IP vandalism due to proposed move to Newcastle, please protect for 1 week until official. JMHamo (talk) 07:17, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 11:00, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism due to media reports on a transfer from Liverpool. Please protect for 1 week until deal is officially confirmed. Thank you. JMHamo (talk) 22:45, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 10:52, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Unsourced transfer speculation. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 10:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. SeaphotoTalk 05:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Ks0stm. Materialscientist (talk) 05:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 01:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- Dianna (talk) 04:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – USER IS REVERTING MY EDITS CLAIMING IT'S VANDALISM WHEN IT'S CLEARLY NOT. Saulo Talk to Me 01:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had the source for the official release date of the single and User:Sauloviegas changed it to be "TBD" without a legit source. --SuperHotWiki (talk) 01:29, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined - Both of you should know better than to accuse each other of vandalism in a content dispute. Any continuation will result in both of you being block for edit warring. KTC (talk) 01:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Too many vandals trying to show off. Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 09:57, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. AlexiusHoratius 22:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – requesting change from PC to semi - all changes have been rejected and they are just clogging up the page history. Also seems like this page is going to be a fairly popular target. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely, and removed the pending-changes protection. I checked back to August and there were no edits that were kept. -- Dianna (talk) 04:39, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant removal of Demba Ba from the 'Current squad', despite him having yet to depart the club. Mattythewhite (talk) 01:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a week. -- Dianna (talk) 04:41, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – request change from PC to semi - there are quite a number of BLP vios and other vandalism being put in the article and they are just clogging up the page history and obviously staying there. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for ten days; pending-changes-protection has been removed. -- Dianna (talk) 04:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: 3 day old content dispute/edit warring - full protection will force parties involved to just talk over edit war.Moxy (talk) 23:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 00:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: (for a very long time please) IP-vandals erase this article very often. They says, that this channel does not exist, but it exists, see the references. Ákos9702 (talk) 18:19, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection (for a month maybe): IPs and new editors causing BLP issues on page.—Ryulong (琉竜) 11:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It seems blocking is the best route here. Rjd0060 (talk) 17:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

04 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:07, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:42, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Unsourced transfer speculation. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Administrator intervention against vandalism (edit | project page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism today from Telstra/Australian IPs... 121.222.26.116/123.211.150.250/124.185.238.202/121.222.148.245. Shearonink (talk) 15:47, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment)Looks like it was just done (right at the time I was posting this Request). Shearonink (talk) 15:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Jauerback. (for the bot). Torreslfchero (talk) 18:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 00:02, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:47, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite protection: subject of constant IP vandalism. Span (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is an edit war between some users on the ethnic origin of the person. Temporary full protection would be OK. --E4024 (talk) 22:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It's not happening enough to wwarrant protection, and it would be more helpful to try and find consensus on the talk page for the wording. GedUK  12:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree. The dispute has been going on for at least two years, to my knowledge, and a 10% sample of edits over that period suggests that nearly half of all edits are involved in this dispute, so there is certainly enough disruption to justify protection. However, contrary to what Spanglej says above, the edit warring is by no means confined to IP editors, more than one established registered user being involved too, so semi-protection would be of limited use, and full protection over a period on the time scale required would probably be overkill. However, that assessment is subject to review, and if the registered users do not stop then a possible compromise might be a short-term full protection to convey the message to the registered users, followed by longer-term semi-protection to stop the IP users. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The edit warring on similar articles (Personalities of the Ottoman Empire) emanate from a nationalist-perspective POV editing of looking into, say XIVth or XVI Century Ottoman statesmen from the XXIst Century "ownership" feelings: "That great guy was a Serbian, Albanian, Greek, Croat (like me)" issue. I think we should look at Ottoman (and in similar cases if exist) historical personalities from a "no-nationality" perspective; only giving a WL to the devşirme article which explains the case better than edit wars after half a millenium. Of course ethnic origin can be used in the later period of the Ottoman Empire (beginning with the independence of Greece) when "nationalities" have a different and justified meaning in an era of "national awakening". --E4024 (talk) 13:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Editwarring SPA. Ignoring talk page warnings. Saddhiyama (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked.. Since the problem is essentially from one IP address, which has no unrelated edits, blocking that one IP address is a more constructive solution than page protection. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:22, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. - Happysailor (Talk) 13:10, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 13:12, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Currently being targeted by an IP sock of Gelios1. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 13:38, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vadalism - I am forced to ask the temporary block of the page due to persistent vandalism from anonymous users. --Wind of freedom (talk) 04:58, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. —Darkwind (talk) 05:23, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent IP-based vandalism ongoing since January 4, 2011 - constant vandalism of protagonist's name made in spurts to avoid page protection. A filter was created for the old version of the page after months and months of identical vandalism (see logs for "Overblood") but after the page move to "OverBlood" (with a capital "B") the filter no longer applies. A request for the filter to be updated was made at WP:EF/R 2 weeks ago, but there has been no response and the vandalism continues. -Thibbs (talk) 05:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let's try pending changes. The levels are low enough for it not to be a chore, but we any constructive IP edits can still go through. GedUK  13:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LONG TERM Semi-protection: This article has already been temporarily protected twice and the IP vandalism restarts as soon as the protection expires. Spidey104 01:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:57, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Constant vandalism. -Dr.Jacob90 (talk) 1:51, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:51, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 04:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Materialscientist (talk) 04:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. StringTheory11 (t • c) 01:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Rjd0060 (talk) 02:23, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect until the beginning of February, after the transfer windows shuts. Too many IP edits without source. JMHamo (talk) 22:25, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MOst of the vandalism isn't trasfer related, so let's try a week for now. GedUK  12:37, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistant edits proclaiming an evil plot to a Disney flash game. Actual flash game (http://www.disney.in/games/games/homeRun_derby_pooh/index.html) contains no such thing. Logan (talk) 03:39, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 04:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC might work as well, but I think semi might be a better solution here. Vacationnine 03:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 04:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Repeatedly recreated. TBrandley (what's up) 20:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Darkwind (talk) 00:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This topic was recently talked about on a live podcast as a joke, receiving a lot of vandalism at the moment as a joke. Lcawte/WebCoder11 (Talk) 02:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 02:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Lots of vandalism, someone should clean the mess - Gonioul (talk) 15:38, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:25, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection Arrested in Operation Yewtree. Most of the time arrestees have been IP Vandalism attacks for about a week and then it dies down. Could there be semi-protection for one or two weeks? JASpencer (talk) 20:22, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 22:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Either Pending changes or semi prot as you see fit. Since this actor's appearance in Doctor Who on 25 December, and her appearance in trailers for the forthcoming new series, the rate of WP:BLP violations has greatly increased. ClueBot NG was triggered twice in last two days. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:43, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Not the first time this page would have to be protected from content dispute. It was protected, I wanna say, last month. A discussion on the talk page took place, agreeing to keep said disputed content in the article. Now, it's being removed again.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 22:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Indefinite move protection remains from previous move warring. —Darkwind (talk) 00:24, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of edit warring , removal of sourced articles. Karthikeyan.pandian (talk) 13:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Darkwind (talk) 21:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by IP users. DavyCrockettJones (talk) 19:01, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. KTC (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – non-notable "label" in some youngster's bedroom in Brooklyn. Altered Walter (talk) 18:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already done by administrator Yunshui.; create protected for 6 months. —Darkwind (talk) 21:17, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please unprotect this talkpage so that I can inform that user of a pending action which implicates them. Thank you. Curatrice (talk) 12:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That editor is indefinitely blocked with talk page access removed. You don't need to inform them of anything. Bretonbanquet (talk) 12:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined GedUK  12:38, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why was that declined? They may not be able to reply then, but there's no harm in letting me add the message there for their information, and for reference by any other interested parties. Curatrice (talk) 12:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
They've been indef blocked for nearly a year. Any pending action isn't going to change that, and I doubt they're still looking. What is the information you want to post? GedUK  12:52, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably we don't know if they're still looking, and we certainly don't know who else might be looking. I (amongst several others) have been accused of being a sock-puppet of theirs, so I think it a matter or courtesy to let them (and other watchers) know and, for the less altruistic purpose, it could be that someone sees it there and is able to offer advice or support in defending myself against that accusation. Curatrice (talk) 12:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected Lowered to semi. I'll watch the page for a while. GedUK  13:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, that helpful response is very much appreciated. Curatrice (talk) 13:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

05 January 2013

Temporary full protection. Page is suffering from an ongoing edit battle, as one editor is removing material sourced to academic papers containing data that they assert has been systematically faked, while the other editor is resisting. Full protection would encourage both to take the discussion to the talk page. Removal of sourced material is not the WP way; but if any credible sourced objections to it have been made (as opposed to personal OR), this should ultimately be noted in the article. The talk page is the best place to work this out. I would strongly request against blocking either editor. RebekahThorn (talk · contribs) is a long-standing productive editor in this subject area, though she may have rather little experience of WP policy and boards and other best ways to seek help to unravel on-wiki conflict. She appealed to the relevant wiki-project for assistance [7], but none was forthcoming. Chriting (talk · contribs) is a new editor, whose edit history so far appears to be entirely removing material. IMO therefore blocks are not the best way forward in this case, would appear punitive when no warnings/counselling have been given, and might well result in the potential turning of either one or both of these editors away from WP for good. Page protection seems to me a better, lower-impact way forward, encouraging User Chriting to learn what is and what is not acceptable on WP, to learn how to use a talk page, and perhaps ultimately to develop into an editor more in tune with WP and more likely to make more long term sustainable contributions. Jheald (talk) 19:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 19:23, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection II: Please, protect this article. Currently it has being again а targeted by several IP-s and one newly registеred user with nationalistic, biased POV-edits. No discussion was held, anyway. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 16:37, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. As I said in my decline of your first request, semi-protection is not appropriate because these edits are not unambiguous vandalism, so this is a content dispute. Since at least one editor involved is autoconfirmed (yourself), full protection is the only available choice to stop the disruptive editing. —Darkwind (talk) 19:41, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection - persistent edit warring and sockpuppetry (evidence here) The associated talk page is also the target of sock atacks Carpathians (talk)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 19:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Log that may cause great vandalism when edited by someone else. Eyesnore (talk) 17:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected GB fan 17:35, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Transcluded in my user page. Forgot to put name 12:44, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected GB fan 17:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute which may develop into edit warring. Borsoka (talk) 08:22, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Since only two editors are involved, blocking them is a much better solution than preventing anyone from editing. (There are also several other problems with this request, including the fact that it is already a full-blooded edit war: "may develop into edit warring" is a bizarre description. I also note that the editor requesting protection is one of the edit warriors, and that he/she made the last edit to the article, shortly before posting this request. Asking for protection of one's own preferred version of an article which is subject to edit-war is not a good idea.) JamesBWatson (talk) 11:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined (for the bot) Armbrust The Homunculus 12:40, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent vandalism, thus clogging the revision history with ClueBot edits,. m'encarta (t) 03:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The vandalism seems to have calmed down lately. —Darkwind (talk) 07:23, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Major Edit Warring. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 23:46, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked: [[User:98.67.162.21 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for 31 hours|<span class="plainlinks userlinks"><span class="userlinks-username">98.67.162.21 <span class="plainlinks">(talk · contribs · [8]) for 31 hours]] ([[User talk:98.67.162.21 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for 31 hours|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/98.67.162.21 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for 31 hours|contribs]]). by Rjd0060 (t c) for disruptive editing. —Darkwind (talk) 07:11, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: User request due to approved change of username and to include the talk page also.Svanslyck (talk) 15:18, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question: What is this protection supposed to accomplish? bibliomaniac15 00:24, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, There's no reason to protect the page, as there's no evidence of vandalism. Preemtivpe protection is frowned upon. See morea at WP:UPROT. Airplaneman ✈ 08:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and edit-waring since at least April 2012. Efforts to resolve the several disputes are ongoing on the article's talk page and include some of the IP editors. Please protect the article only, not the talk page.

  • The article is rated B-Class and High-Importance by Wikipedia:WikiProject Central Asia.
  • The vandalism/edit wars include includes "(Tag: references removed)," section blanking, Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute, and Wikipedia:Disputed statement.
  • The vandalism and edit wars are from a wide (international) range of IP addresses. These include (since at least June 2012) the following unique IPs: 96.54.181.40, 75.182.97.213, 68.7.122.13, 78.70.77.35, 64.56.229.52, 70.96.13.194, 173.22.127.195, 199.117.106.36, 124.183.173.147, 58.164.16.145, 76.29.225.242, 118.93.173.59, 84.189.164.106, 74.79.133.31, 68.194.72.57, 184.66.191.164, 63.234.49.182, 67.230.148.178, 174.97.133.100, 174.99.77.26, 153.25.178.60, and 76.21.181.208.
  • The edit wars continued after the page was temporarily protected on 27 May 2011 by Cirt.

- ʈucoxn\talk 09:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected (Indef.) Very long-term persistent edit warring, together with other problems, such as copy-pasting sources into the article. Attempts by registered users to resolve the dispute and produce a compromise solution have been ignored by IP edit warriors. The dispute goes back at least as far as April 2011. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – the protection log is as long as my arm and the vandalism and BLP violations don't seem to stop. I think it's time to bit the bullet (especially since the BLP vios are just sitting in the page history instead of not being there at all) and semi indef it. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of an indefinite amount of time, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 08:31, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Please, protect this article. Currently it has being targeted by several IP-s with unexplained, nationalistic, biased POV-edits. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 12:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Given that this is a content dispute you're involved in and you're an autoconfirmed user, semi-protection isn't an option, and given the history, the page doesn't qualify for full protection. I suggest you try resolving the issue on the article talk page first. —Darkwind (talk) 06:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection – The only edits since 25 June 2012 were vandal edits by 17 users; many, many more before then. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. —Darkwind (talk) 07:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 07:30, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection Both articles have deep histories of the usual kids show IPs trying to push on their dream winners, categories and hosts onto the articles despite the network not announcing anything about the 2013 show until the middle of next month at the earliest. Six months for the main article as has been done in the past, two weeks to a month for the 2013 show. Nate • (chatter) 03:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 07:30, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Temporary protection hasn't been tried yet, so let's see if this will discourage the vandals. —Darkwind (talk) 07:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term BLP vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected.: the article is already indefinitely pending-changes protected. —Darkwind (talk) 07:18, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 07:22, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent and deliberate addition of dubious, hoaxed or unsourced content in the Mafia characters sheet. From what I know after playing the games, some of the characters never really died as claimed by the vandals, i.e. Detective Norman who was claimed to have perished from a plane crash, yet the game doesn't have any references to it AT ALL. Blake Gripling (talk) 01:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 07:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Unregistered or newly registered users seem to be constantly changing lists of current/upcoming events. Often this is false or misleading information as to dates and venues, but in some cases involves addition of patent nonsense. AKKIfokkusuTaLk 23:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Long protection term due to the vandalism resuming almost immediately after last semi-protect expired. —Darkwind (talk) 07:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: False sales figures, false chart positions and incorrectly sourced and formatted (and false) certifications continually re-added by various IPs constantly, despite continued reversions with clear edit summaries explaining why said edits are wrong. I feel protection is necessary as I think the vandalism will only continue if it is not applied – as this is a discography of a popular artist, new IPs will keep arriving to add their false information. (The examples I've given here are only a selection – a look at the page history shows several more.) I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 19:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. If it resumes after the protection expires, please re-request and we can consider a longer period. —Darkwind (talk) 07:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-protection: An anonomous user is using several diffrent IPs(appears to be using Proxy servers or IP masking) to delete an image of the real Tony Mokbel and replace it with his own image as some kind of sick joke. Please lock the article so that only auto-confirmed users can edit this page. This vandalism has been occuring over a long period of time(more than 6 months), so short temporary semi-protection isn't appropriate at this stage as it will not have the desired effect. Please put indefinate semi-protection, or a longer period of temporary semi-protection(at least a month or two). Colliric (talk) 16:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 06:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Not sure I requested the right one but this has been cut and pasted recreated a few times, including the csd template too...Salting might be a good idea. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. There's only one creation of that page, although the creator in question has been making a lot of CSD'd pages. Perhaps talking/warning them would be a better approach. bibliomaniac15 00:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lugia2453 (talk) 02:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator 7. --Webclient101talk 03:04, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. TBrandley (what's up) 01:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already done.. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:44, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Massive vandalism spree - check the page history. WikiPuppies bark dig 19:30, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. by Soap (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Armbrust The Homunculus 22:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection full protection: Edit warring - some users are adding unsourced info to this article. This has been happening since February 2012 as per history. Forgot to put name 08:37, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - I'm not sure that it's appropriate to fully protect the article after almost all of the content was recently deleted without discussion. It seems some editors disagree with that move, and are trying to restore the article instead of discussing it. While it would be better if they discussed it, I don't think it has risen to the level where we need to lock them out of the article. ‑Scottywong| chatter _ 23:12, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 23:34, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 3 months. bibliomaniac15 00:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Webclient101 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Persistent vandalism by socking IP addresses. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 19:51, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for one day. bibliomaniac15 00:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. (EC) Feel free to request unprotection sooner if you wish. I see a pattern of harassment. Rjd0060 (talk) 00:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Article keeps being re-created after been speedy deleted. JetBlast (talk) 18:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. bibliomaniac15 00:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism almost every day. Astros4477 (talk) 16:37, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 10 days. bibliomaniac15 00:23, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: The article was persistently vandalized from the past few days. This would be better if the article will be PC protected temporarily for some time. Mediran (t • c) 10:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| confer _ 00:12, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unprotected ‑Scottywong| spill the beans _ 23:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

06 January 2013

Semi-prot The level of vandalism/WP:BLP violation has increased significantly in the last week. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks... but is there a reason that you lifted the move prot at the same time? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:17, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Highly visible template with 295 transclusions. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Highly visible template with 387 transclisions. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:16, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. - Happysailor (Talk) 17:49, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 18:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated insertion of unsourced content and allegations by IP-hopper. Semi-protect please for a few weeks until this idiot gets bored. . Biker Biker (talk) 14:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 18:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Full-protection: Edit waring/WP:POV pushing involving another user; his revisions include blanking content that he does not agree with (including reliably sourced/referenced information) and not using the article talk page or user talk pages to discuss his disagreements. He was recently warned about this on a now-archived Administrators' noticeboard case and was extremely defiant to both administrators and other editors who participated in the discussion. The Generation X page has a lengthy protection history, but I'm not sure if it relates to the same editor. --Danteferno (talk) 02:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I encourage you both to discuss this on the talk page, and take the issue to WP:ANEW or dispute resolution if you can't reach a resolution there. —Darkwind (talk) 18:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recently, 3 vandalism edits over past few days. Anyway, don't want any unneccessary IP disruption on my user page. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 14:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected KTC (talk) 16:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: request change from indef semi to indef PC - the page was placed on pending changes during the trial and I can't see a reason why it can't go back. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done KTC (talk) 16:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: Many IPs are edting this article making it a wreck.They deleted some contents and added their own. Menaces (talk) 09:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of honorific title to the name of the person by an IP. — Abhishek  Talk 08:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection - Keeps undergoing vandalism of various sorts (promotional fuzz and broken information) being added by several IPs - I'd like this to be stopped, at least temporarily. Lukeno94 (talk) 08:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism from a particular IP who keeps creating a joke out of the national anthem, try protecting from a few weeks?. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 07:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Constant genre warring, vandalism and incorrect info. Someone added a genre with this edit almost a month ago and it was unsourced. then someone tried to keep it there with an unreliable source for the genre but it was unreliable and was NOT put next to that genre though. There has been constant disputes, and recently an IP had put vandalism in the history section in the beginning of that section. The genre's consensus was reached long ago, but now people just ignore it. I'd recommend a monthly protection. Even some people revert these edits but then the pre-genre war state edits get reverted back to the genre war state with unsourced content or genres with no consensus made defying the consensus made long ago. 2601:A:4100:5A:A538:D76B:C74F:B580 (talk) 01:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined — There's commentary on the talk page from at least one autoconfirmed editor that they want to discuss the genre issue again. As this is a genuine content dispute involving autoconfirmed editors, semi-protection is inapproprate, and it's not yet reached the point of edit warring or disruptive editing enough to justify full protection. Please discuss on the talk page, and re-report if the editing becomes disruptive (or take it to WP:ANEW at that point). —Darkwind (talk) 09:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Widr (talk) 23:08, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Darkwind (talk) 09:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protection: Highly visible page – this template is seen in highly visible pages, related to "Did you know...?". George Ho (talk) 16:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide more information on the reasons for this request? I'm not convinced. This template is used only in Template:Did you know/Queue, which is only used internally (thus, this template is not "highly visible"). Moreover, I note that this template hasn't been updated to include links to Prep Areas 3 and 4, which have existed for a few years now -- suggesting to me that it doesn't get much attention (also I have to say that I don't use this template when I'm updating the DYK queue). --Orlady (talk) 20:38, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh... I didn't check properly. Is one page enough to be highly visible? --George Ho (talk) 21:12, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"High visibility" is an indicator of the damage that would be done if somebody moved or edited the template. A template that's used on a lot of pages is highly visible and generally needs to be protected because of the damage that would be done if were altered improperly. I don't guess there'd be any harm done in move-protecting this template, but I don't see any particular need for protection. --Orlady (talk) 22:37, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. —Darkwind (talk) 09:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: The exact wording w/ respect to Depardieu's nationality is still being discussed on the talkpage; various IPs and new users are trying to change the wording w/o discussing. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 08:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: article was indef semi'd in December 2008 for sockpuppetry. The protecting admin and the other user to contact (mentioned in protection log) are both inactive (and have been for some time) hence why I came here. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:56, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Materialscientist (talk) 10:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: article indefinitely semi protected in December 2008 (without a history of protection), I've left a message for the protecting admin but he isn't very active. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:41, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Materialscientist (talk) 11:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP sock of MalesAlwaysBest . Darkness Shines (talk) 08:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP sock of MalesAlwaysBest . Darkness Shines (talk) 08:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP sock of MalesAlwaysBest . Darkness Shines (talk) 08:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. STATic message me! 06:27, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Short-term vandalism. PC protection would do the job right. -- LuK3 (Talk) 05:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Urgent protection as there seems to be a huge amount of sockpuppetry tacking place here to push a particular POV - evidenced by creation of a number of new SPA accounts in a very short time. . Biker Biker (talk) 09:55, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 09:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Still a target of hoaxing by users, i.e. Vekipeki965. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Every IP wants to add his two goals in his debut for Chelsea in the FA Cup, but the infobox is only for league-games. Kinda waste of time to revert all the time, a 48 hours semi-protection should be enough. Mentoz86 (talk) 21:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This one is quite urgent could someone have a look quickly, it would be appreciated. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 22:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This has been here over seven hours now & page has received around 60 edits since the request went in. About 25 of those have been the further addition of the exact same deliberate inaccuracies in violation of consensus, which have had to be rejected. It would be nice it someone actually did something, Thank you. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 04:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As a reviewer who has been reviewing the edits to this page, I can attest that this a case where Pending Changes only made the problem worse: I came in from the outside, unaware of a consensus regarding said infobox, and accepted multiple inaccurate edits. Clearly, PC has not done its job here and Semi-protection is needed. RedSoxFan2434 (talk) 04:56, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Given the escalation since the request was made, it will need longer then 48 hours. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 05:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Set at 1 week given the other recent short-term period of protection didn't prove long enough. Please let me know if the problems continue. Nick-D (talk) 05:47, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from various IP users. — иz нίpнόp ʜᴇʟᴘ! 02:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 2 weeks. bibliomaniac15 02:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Clear BLP violations allegedly by someone involved in a dispute with the subject,. ukexpat (talk) 01:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Not sure how much this would help, considering the user who added the information is an autoconfirmed user. - Happysailor (Talk) 01:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator DeltaQuad. (one fully protected week) Armbrust The Homunculus 03:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuously vandalised during last two days. Zia Khan 19:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC). Zia Khan 19:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - Most of the recent edits don't seem to be vandalism, but rather appear to be good-faith attempts to improve the article. Moreover, much of the recent activity is by established users, so semi-protection wouldn't help address it. This looks more like a WP:Content dispute than vandalism. Please try to work out the differences on the talk page. If the dispute continues, full protection of the page might be called for, but that won't help you with edits required for WP:FLC. Note: I left a message with one user, asking them to use edit summaries and the talk page to communicate. --Orlady (talk) 22:28, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – IP users repeatedly adding potentially libellous statements about (sometimes named) BW officials. Three times on this one, three times on related British Waterways. Semi protection for a while might slow them down, persuade them to get an account, look for refs etc. Talk page discussion with IP editors has got me nowhere so far. DBaK (talk) 17:12, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 19:45, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – IP users repeatedly adding potentially libellous statements about (sometimes named) BW officials. Three times on this one, three times on related Canal & River Trust. Semi protection for a while might slow them down, persuade them to get an account, look for refs etc. Talk page discussion with IP editors has got me nowhere so far. DBaK (talk) 17:12, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Mufka. for 1 month. —Darkwind (talk) 19:43, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi Protection: Persistent vandalism -- I'm Titanium  chat 08:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Darkwind (talk) 19:23, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

07 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Various IPs have recently been used to vandalize this page.The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 20:13, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 21:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Delta Force (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Semiprotect. Persistent content removal by IP editor. The IP keeps changing enough that a simple block won't handle it (no need to do a range block over this), nor can we do progressive warnings. The semiprotect is the best route. Given his dedication to long-term, a month might be warranted. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined — Per the protection policy, "Talk pages are not usually protected, and are only semi-protected for a limited duration in the most severe cases of vandalism," which this isn't. —Darkwind (talk) 17:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP harassment - similar to what happened in June on this talk page. Semi-protect due to likelihood of IP hopping. Jasper Deng (talk) 07:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The fandom has its collective hate boner out for me because I'm enforcing WP:V and WP:NOR on a fact that is true but can't be proven as such. —Ryulong (琉竜) 06:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistant crude racial profiling. RH - (rosscoolguy) (talk) 19:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 18:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 10:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:10, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary move protection: Highly visible page – This page is about a very popular topic. It was recently moved before being restored. I am requesting move protection for at least the next month. Andrew327 16:47, 7 January 2013 (UTC). Andrew327 16:47, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected – One month, due to move warring. There is a move discussion in progress at Talk:2012 Delhi gang rape case#Requested move; so far most of the participants oppose a move. EdJohnston (talk) 16:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Came into the limelight as a result of a controversial statement regarding the recent Delhi Rape incident. Vandalism has been happening since then. . Logik 08:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Future Perfect at Sunrise. (2 weeks) Armbrust The Homunculus 14:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Page receives persistent vandalism from first time vandals. Observing the page history, it has already reached saturation with regard to useful edits. (All casual edit(or)s are non-constructive). Staticd (talk) 03:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 13:58, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Endless vandalism 74.73.161.11 (talk) 03:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC) This article was previously semi-protected for a week because somebody kept adding Tom and Bill Kaulitz as notable residents despite the fact that there is no credible proof that they live there. The information was removed, but a week after the protection was lifted, the information was added again. I only noticed it today. The editor said that this should be talked out in the comments, but it's not going to happen. The people editing it to add the information are insane Tokio Hotel fangirls who are completely irrational. The only way to stop the edit war where someone adds the Kaulitzes and then someone else removes them is to fully protect this article. Please protect this article. Please.[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Try creating an account so you can keep the page on your watchlist and be notified of changes. —Darkwind (talk) 05:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protection - to avoid future POINTYness and timewasting at deletion processes. This was created initially as a redirect to Masonic conspiracy theories, and was CSDed because of tone and hoax (claims were made a few times historically, never shown to have ever occurred in actuality, and have been debunked or ignored). Same author then recreated the page as an article that was a copy/POV fork of a section in the aforementioned conspiracy theories article, and when a CSD template was put on it, the author changed it to a redirect again to get rid of the template. but as that removal was against policy, it was CSDed anyway, and I think two CSDs in tow days is quite enough. MSJapan (talk) 01:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 13:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism. CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 00:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Darkwind (talk) 05:38, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A series of controversial notability changes to Pampa, Texas about a Miles Bateman and corresponding reverts appears to need an administrator's intervention. I did one revert because he doesn't appear notable. I also reverted a change by User:98.225.44.41 because it attributed the changes to Bateman without providing any support for the charge. Unfortunately by the time I posted a warning to User talk:98.225.44.41 my login had expired so the warning is from my IP address. I received an apology and comments by User:98.225.44.41 on my talk page.
Thanks for your assistance. SBaker43 (talk) 23:23, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Did not qualify for PC protection due to high rate of recent edits. —Darkwind (talk) 13:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, BLP violations, and insertion of unsourced info by anonymous editors. The article's topic is the subject of ongoing, notable controversy within his musical genre and otherwise. Temporary semi-protection has been granted in the past and seems to have recently expired. 3hunna (talk) 06:24, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Long term due to resumed BLP vandalism immediately after expiration of last 3-month protection. —Darkwind (talk) 13:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations. Geraldo Perez (talk) 06:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 06:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Repeated violations of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lil Twist, IP editors keep removing the redirect and putting in content for a non notable person. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 23:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. We can't assume this person will never be notable. —Darkwind (talk) 05:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated insertion of unsourced / original research and a threat to an admin (diff) on the IP's talk page to persist with this behaviour. Semi-protection would most likely sort the problem and the editor involved will then most likely go back to knitting or editing Wikia. . Biker Biker (talk) 22:45, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator PhilKnight. 1 week duration. —Darkwind (talk) 05:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated. JayJayWhat did I do? 02:02, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 02:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing AFD, random IP's vandalizing. . JayJayWhat did I do? 01:10, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, No longer necessary - article deleted via AFD. Rjd0060 (talk) 01:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes → semi protection: CambridgeBayWeather (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) PC protected this page, but it is recieving a lot of edits with new edit requests coming in regularly. Given PC shouldn't be used on high traffic pages can an admin change this to semi please? I haven't gone straight to CambridgeBayWeather because he's offline and this isn't going to get any better. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – vandalism and BLP violations. Trident Studios (talk) 21:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Favonian (talk) 21:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Page is currently on Reddit. yes hello, nprice (was) here. (talk) 23:15, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 23:23, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I was going to ask for semi-protection because of the anon ip, but to be honest I didn't read this content war enough to know who's right. Maybe 3 days of full protection or a week of semi-protection is warranted here. Your call. Over the last week or so many anon ips have been reverted by multiple editors. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Jarry1250. (2 days) Armbrust The Homunculus 00:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Due to recent stories in press. Telfordbuck (talk) 16:10, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The existing pending change protection appears to be enough. KTC (talk) 19:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Same improper edit over & over (every few days) from same editor using a variety of IP addresses from one small area in N.J. All attempts to communicate via edit summaries and talk pages have been disregarded. Please semiprotect for at least two weeks (preferably a full month) to discourage further disruption. Thank you. Hertz1888 (talk) 21:07, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Indef-blocked User:AndresHerutJaim continues to use socks to edit the article. This has been going on since last spring (see article history) and is not likely to stop. Frederico1234 (talk) 19:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It's not customary to go to indefinite protection until a long but finite protection has been tried. Favonian (talk) 22:04, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism/ Counter-Vandalism is almost half the edits of this page's history. Mr.Magik-Pants (talk) 17:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Even though prior vandalism indicates a likely chance it will be vandalized again, we can't pre-emptively protect the page. —Darkwind (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

08 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 20:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 20:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Thrashing the page due to disputes on talk page. Let them find resolution on the talk page first. This has been going on so long and is mixed in with undisputed edits so I don't think it's helpful to revert to any particular version. Jojalozzo 19:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 20:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: persistent addition of unreferenced future episode info. Show will be done early Feb so only a short protect should be needed. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 20:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Edit warring over addition/deletion of material concerning Michael Buble; attempts to get the other party to discuss on talk page have been fruitless. --Pergish1 (talk) 18:55, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 20:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism (blanking) today. You can leave semi-protection on permanently. I rarely get IP messages anyway.

The blanking vandalism is also occurring elsewhere today with my messages and the messages of User:Carolmooredc. Her page has been semi-protected since August 2011. I had left some messages on her talk page today. The blanking vandalism started the same day. See today's history of Template talk:Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement (edit | template | history | links | watch | logs). Carolmooredc and I had communicated on that talk page. That talk page needs semi-protection too, probably longterm. As you can tell from the topic it is probably going to be a vandalism magnet in the future too. --Timeshifter (talk) 18:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. (I didn't go with permanent as the vandalism was almost all recent stuff. Permanent talk page protection is only used in the worst cases.) AlexiusHoratius 20:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: continuous attempts of edit warring supposedly by the same Anon editor whose main purpose is adding a misleading word to the article's title and some expressions without citing reliable sources to substantiate her/his claims. Borsoka (talk) 17:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected - Two months. Nationalistic edit warring by IPs who don't wait for consensus on the talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 18:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Johnhassett (talk) 14:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. But thank you for reverting the vandalism. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Nelsen has agreed to become head coach of FC Toronto, but has not left QPR yet, please protect until QPR confirm the date he's leaving the club. JMHamo (talk) 16:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:05, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

long term semi protection - the overwhelming majority of the frequent IP edits to the article have been inappropriate turning this BLP into a fan page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 17:05, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – IPs adding unsourced contents. Torreslfchero (talk) 11:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism from user Jan palmowski. This is also a case of false personation since user Jan palmowski is not the former head of school. Knave84 (talk) 11:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It can't be IP vandalism from a user. Better to take action against the individual than protect the article. GedUK  12:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – test page created 3 times in an hour by youngster, speedy tag removal, etc. Duplicate Monu Rohit was salted 2 days ago. Altered Walter (talk) 14:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Lectonar (talk) 15:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – 2 days? Suspect some of the vandals are socks. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 14:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – full protection for say... 2 days? I suspect sockpuppetry by that blocked IP as well. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 14:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 14:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Zzuuzz.. Airplaneman ✈ 14:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

long term semi protection - controversial BLP subject to current and long term vandalism by IPs and new users. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Involved in edit warring and POV pushing. See also [9]. Codrin.B (talk) 14:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution.; also see the ANI thread. Lectonar (talk) 10:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Involved in edit warring and POV pushing. See also [10]. Codrin.B (talk) 14:05, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution.; also see the ANI thread. Lectonar (talk) 10:16, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Multiple new users and IPs have been trolling the article, editing the subject has died - despite the subject being alive. — MST☆R (Chat Me!) 09:24, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. and User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. Lectonar (talk) 09:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Regular Vandalism. abg 04:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Stats frequently being changed by IPs. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Use the article talk-page to hash it out. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 09:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Looming editwar due to an editor who dislikes the Republika Srpska. The Banner talk 20:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Lectonar (talk) 09:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Currently being targeted by an IP sock of User:Nangparbat. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Vandalism was 4 days ago; just wachtlist and revert (I have watchlisted too). Lectonar (talk) 09:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined (for the bot) Armbrust The Homunculus 09:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: 6 months suggested. Persistent vandalism (33 edits since Aug 2012) by one or more IP users of a biography of a living person. After removal of good faith content, wasteful AfD was proposed.--Nixie9 (talk) 13:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The vandalism was by only a few IP's, and in 2 "bursts"; I would opt for a sofixit here. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 09:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous vandalism from unregistered users. Zia Khan 12:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC). Zia Khan 12:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Vandalism was mostly one IP and has ceased over 12 hours ago. —Darkwind (talk) 05:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined (for the bot) Armbrust The Homunculus 09:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, WP:OR issues, and unsourced additions since December. — Oz 12:13, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Seems to have died down; if necessary, relist. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 09:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined (for the bot) Armbrust The Homunculus 09:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: IP keeps removing tags without addressing the issues. There has been extensive discussion on the talk page regarding the issues but they still haven't been addressed by the editor who created this article. obi2canibetalk contr 16:49, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Lectonar (talk) 09:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Siavash777 (talk) 22:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC) Semi-protection: User Siavash777 continues to make reversions without discussing them on talk page. Further, the user has a Conflict of Interest which is being adjudicated here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard. Kabirat (talk) 07:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Seems to have died down for the moment; please use the article talk-page to discuss, and if necessary relist here. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 09:24, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined (for the bot) Armbrust The Homunculus 09:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – student director, unlikely to be notable this year, created three times in an hour by one of his friends. Altered Walter (talk) 12:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected for a period of 1 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 12:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: page was indef semi'd in December 2009, due to sockpuppetry (protecting admin has retired). Can we please try PC (then maybe unprotecting if PC works ok)?. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Let's give it a try. Although Bambifan may be back....see ANI. Lectonar (talk) 11:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. IP disruption. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Makecat 14:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Parishan (talk) 08:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection for at least three months. Identical vandalism from multiple IP addresses has been going on since at least last November. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 10:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Heated content dispute - Content with BLP issues repeatedly being inserted without consensus doscussion. Youreallycan 08:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 10:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism for the past few days. SeaphotoTalk 03:59, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Numerous non registered users removing sourced content. Edit:I meant to click semi protect indefinite. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 03:08, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Page has experienced significant vandalism and article is highly visible right now. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 01:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
+ List of motorcycle clubs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
+ Motorcycle club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Request semi-protection due to frequent vandalism (undiscussed changes / removal of information) by multiple IPs: 85.189.246.67 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) 81.159.107.161 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) 213.48.63.1 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) 217.33.26.100 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) 90.210.191.103 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) --Trofobi (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Update: + Sjgarth (talk · contribs) + 86.163.156.53 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) --Trofobi (talk) 23:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. for the first listed; shorter protections for the other two by Mark Arsten. Lectonar (talk) 09:33, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Stop Islamization of America (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Semiprotect. Persistent trolling by the same user from too many IP addresses to deal with through a block. (Vandalism by the same user is why the article itself is currently protected.) Been going on since mid/late December, so I don't know what sort of duration would be best. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:11, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. Lectonar (talk) 09:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: A (changing) IP address is repeatedly deleting sourced content from this Featured Article and replacing it with unsourced material. It has also been subjected to prolonged disruption from other IPs over several months. This needs semi-protecting for a while (a few weeks?) to let things settle down. Prioryman (talk) 08:54, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 08:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A recent tide of fools seems to have targeted this page. Since there's really no reason why anyone would need to contact a long retired user, especially one that anyone with reasonable cause to speak with probably already knows how to find (he's still on Commons), I see no reason why we can't semi-protect this for a few weeks/months. . Sven Manguard Wha? 06:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Materialscientist (talk) 09:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Makecat 02:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked., Orangemike can protect his pages as he wishes. Materialscientist (talk) 02:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection or PC protection Long-term abuse / persistent sockpuppetry. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 05:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 01:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 05:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection for a period of 72 hours: Recent death; substantial uptick in edits; some of which may not be accurate pbp 00:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 05:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Currently being targeted by an IP sock of User:Nangparbat. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection or semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 16:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. —Darkwind (talk) 17:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 02:45, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 02:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Since last semiprotection expired 2 days ago, has been vandalized about 10 times. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 02:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – This article is getting vandalized frequently by IP address users and other registered users. . Som999 (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. In the past month there have been three edits by IPs and one by an account which was not yet confirmed. Though these occurred in the last 8 days, I don't think the level of vandalism has yet reached a level where protection is necessary. Nev1 (talk) 22:17, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP violations – continuing edits against BLP - no response to talk page requests. ukexpat (talk) 20:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for three days. I think I protected the BLP-clean version. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:55, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you did thanks. We are working this out slowly.--ukexpat (talk) 01:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Unsourced transfer speculation. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:47, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. POV pushing by IP hopper. Jim1138 (talk) 08:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – immediate resumed after last PC expired. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 01:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Unsourced sales changes. — Oz 21:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:56, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-protection or Long-term Semi-protection Page is repeatedly plagued with IP conspiracy nuts. Previous short-term semi-protections were ineffective. Buffs (talk) 17:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:08, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A an editor who sets up socks has been finding it amusing to age the subject by forty years. The vandalism is caught fairly quickly but shouldn't be happening at all. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 22:08, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Anon vandals have launched a coordinated attack on the page. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Both done, FIFA Ballon d'Or by User:Mufka — 2012 FIFA Ballon d'Or by me. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:47, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 19:13, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Torreslfchero (talk) 07:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2w, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. What a mess. --j⚛e deckertalk 21:52, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

09 January 2013

Semi-protection: Repeated serious violations of WP:BLP policy. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.It is PRODded anyway. Lectonar (talk) 17:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP vandalism. IP addresses keep changing three specific dates on the page, all of which are unsourced and untrue. The dates they are changing from are verified, sourced and correct. Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP violations by IPs adding incorrect, tangential, and poorly cited list entries. Binksternet (talk) 06:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined As far as I can see, the issue seems to be with one IP (the other is adding Al Gore, and that seems to be reasonably sourced?), so it would be better to report that IP for edit warring at WP:3RRN. GedUK  12:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Too much IP vandalism. -- I'm Titanium  chat 12:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Creator is repeatedly overturning consensus reached at the AFD for a redirect. They are recreating the page and edit warring to do so. Vacationnine 12:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by MBisanz Vacationnine 12:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP edits revolving around the recent murder, or suicide, of the manager of the show who provided the weapons. The fringe is on fire that it was a government sanctioned killing, other saying suicide, etc etc. Lots of edits in the past 24 hours. PeterWesco (talk) 05:53, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Not all of the edits by IP's are vandalism; ok, we have some of the fringe things, but on the whole I'd say semiprotection is not yet necessary. I'll put it on my watchlist too. If problems get worse, please relist. Lectonar (talk) 08:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – WP:KAGE. Makecat 08:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Monu kumar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Talk:Monu Rohit (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Vanity page repeatedly created by blocked user User talk:Monurohit and User talk:Monu Rohitt. Altered Walter (talk) 10:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - only two socks so far. I think it is easier to delete and block than salt all possible targets at this stage. Talk:Monu Rohit will be speeded as G8 anyway. Materialscientist (talk) 10:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Creation protected, for all of the above and a few others - sorry MS, I hadn't seen your response here. Feel free to unprotect if you feel it's necessary. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, its fine - two of them should not be created anyway because of capitalization. Materialscientist (talk) 10:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for being a gentleman about it. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Anon IP's, apparently with a personal agenda, repeatedly re-insert the same poorly sourced copy about a trademark dispute, despite reverts by a number of editors. See talk. Wwwhatsup (talk) 05:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Since the unregistered editors in question are citing a source, this is a content dispute. As it involves both unregistered and autoconfirmed users, full protection is required. Please discuss the issue on the talk page and come to a resolution, or use dispute resolution. —Darkwind (talk) 07:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: IP users have been vandalizing the page that I had to add it to my Watchlist, but it's impossible to take care of it now. ComputerJA (talk) 05:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 05:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request semi-protection, repeated vandalism by IP editors. . GregJackP Boomer! 04:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 05:45, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of very poorly sourced content by IP-hopping editor. . Biker Biker (talk) 22:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Looks like a content dispute, and one which hasn't yet quite reached the level of an edit war. I recommend taking the issue to the talk page and discussing, if the problem continues past 3RR, return and we can discuss full protection. --j⚛e deckertalk 01:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP edit wars recently over labelling regarding Heard's sexuality. Aaaccc (talk), 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. KTC (talk) 00:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite move-protection Persistent move-vandalism. Moved twice in less than a month. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected. Airplaneman ✈ 03:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection: IP blanking of needed, referenced, technical explanation. This is a continuation of persistent IP-stalker behavior. See Bootleggers and Baptists and my homepage. Please protect that too. Thank you, Attleboro (talk) 22:20, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: While I've indef semi'd your user page, I'm leaving the question of what to do about the MSE page to another admin. --j⚛e deckertalk 02:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The vandalism seems fairly recent; hopefully they'll be bored in a week's time. Airplaneman ✈ 03:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 21:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 48 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 03:46, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistant vandalism by several IP users. RH - (rosscoolguy) (talk) 01:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 01:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 23:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 01:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Webclient101talk 23:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 50 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Not just recent troubles there, even if this is the first protection this article has gotten. --j⚛e deckertalk 02:05, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated vandalism by an ip hopping editor (or editors) based on an internet joke. The article has been protected and users blocked, but the behavior has continued now for some time. Longer term protection, say for 6 months, would be helpful.   — Jess· Δ♥ 22:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 77 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 02:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. This is a delisted "good article" that has had a staggering number of temporary protections since 2006. The article has been protected three times in the last year alone. I believe that the article's "endemic and endless vandalism problems" satisfies wikipedia's requirements for permanent semi-protection. Further as the subject is alive this creates obvious BLP issues. I raised the possibility of requesting protection on the article's talk page in response to an administrator's complaint here that he keeps removing the same unreferenced and unencyclopedic information added to the article. Editor time is better spent elsewhere. Thank you. - Fanthrillers (talk) 22:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Long-term record of above-average levels of vandalism, BLP. --j⚛e deckertalk 01:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection: Has been temporarily semi-protected several times and whenever the protection is lifted, the anon IP vandalism begins again. Too much for a low-traffic article; editor time can be better spent elsewhere. Montanabw(talk) 22:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 00:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism over the past few days. PM800 (talk) 20:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Plot vandalism. RH - (rosscoolguy) (talk) 18:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. AlexiusHoratius 20:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

10 January 2013

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Requesting temporary full protection until the content dispute between two autoconfirmed and good editors (there may be more editors too, but mainly two editors) get solved and a consensus is reached. Tito Dutta (talk) 14:37, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KTC (talk) 14:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The series has caused such a controversey with everyone accusing it of being fake. Numerous IP users add fragments throughout the article about how it's fake, even though it's talked about in the article in a professional matter; some people are baboons and can't read it before adding their 2 cents. Recollected (talk) 03:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:56, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and genre warring, unconstructive edits that express ones opinion, removing sourced genres and replacing with them with unsourced content without a consensus. They come constantly from IPs. Changing the genre from deathcore to extreme metal or death metal or metalcore or metal or something. Try looking at IP edits on its history page. (I'd recommend a protection for at least a month. BlastBeat4 (talk) 01:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 15:32, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Makecat 13:56, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 48 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:26, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – IPs removing sourced contents and also adding unsourced materials. . Torreslfchero (talk) 12:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of half a year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced content by IP. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 10:37, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 10:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – recreated several times since 2009 . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 12:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. Lectonar (talk) 12:25, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:110.32.141.103 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection or reblock: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 07:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. by User:Malik Shabazz.--Makecat 07:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalized by many IPs in a small range. Makecat 06:48, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Seems to have been a short "burst" of vandalism. Lectonar (talk) 10:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: IP vandalism. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Dan56 (talk) 18:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 10:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 10:15, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 10:03, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 10:16, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP reversions while the article has an active AfD. JeffreyAtW (talk) 21:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Lectonar. (10 days) Armbrust The Homunculus 10:15, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: multiple ips appear to be edit-warring on the article. NiciVampireHeart 18:29, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Bbb23. (1 week) Armbrust The Homunculus 10:13, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection or some other solution: The article's semi-protection expired recently. Somes IPs keep removing content from the article. A semi-protect might work. But the vandalism is always of a same type, i.e removal of references (not the text supported by them) and removal of references along with subject's information on relationship status. I suppose its some fan of hers who cant stand that she is committed. Is there some different solution out? Because once the protection expires, it is likely to repeat again. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Article as a long history of IP violations of WP:NPOV and WP:MEDRS, together with blanking of sourced content and blatant editorialising . AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:48, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:59, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent insertion over 2+ weeks by anon editor (a range of similar IPs, likely one person) of unsourced info including specific dates for events that have not happened yet. JohnInDC (talk) 02:28, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Makecat 07:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected I've made it two weeks, as (ideally) user-talk pages should not be protected at all (there are many IP's who contribute positively). If you want the semiprotection prolonged or lifted, just ping me. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 07:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Harassment by different IPs. Makecat 07:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by User:Gogo Dodo.--Makecat 07:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lady Lotus (talk) 23:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 07:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Disagreement in discussion from BLPN is spilling into acting-out in the article. Section blanking without discussion, repeated reverts, etc. ► Belchfire-TALK 01:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dislosure: Belchfire is attempting to game the system as he is currently involved in an edit war with other editors on that page and trying to "win" that edit war by requesting protection to "his" version. The page would be best served by blocking Belchfire for edit warring, not by protection. Viriditas (talk) 01:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Diffs, please. ► Belchfire-TALK 01:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reverted to 25 Dec before all this started. KTC (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Tag team editors with no TALK editing sourced parts. --AmherstApple (talk) 00:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Most edits since the New Year have been vandalism or reverts of vandalism. GotR Talk 23:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Guillermo 22:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 22:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continual vandalism and edit warring by IP. Prof. Squirrel (talk) 20:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I've also applied pending changes protection indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 22:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Makecat 15:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – IP have already been blocked instead. KTC (talk) 15:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Lots of edit warring from SPAs and anonymous editors adding a non-free image repeatedly (probably because the page is currently linked from an entry on the front page of reddit). Esrever (klaT) 17:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. for one week by Mike Rosoft. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

11 January 2013

Semi-protection. Persistent IP vandalism. Tgeairn (talk) 18:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 18:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for 2 weeks to prevent further BLP issues; over a racist comment on Twitter. See BBC News. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-20986579. JMHamo (talk) 15:11, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. for three days by Ponyo. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:10, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 13:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 18:17, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – regular vandalism from IP's. MisterShiney ✉ 07:07, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:10, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent, varied, propaganda-fuelled IP vandalism. Sabre (talk) 05:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:07, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A recent rash of IP vandalism. DPH1110 (talk) 04:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:06, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: The film was released today and there is quite a bit of spamming, ip edits and vandalism going on. I request temporary protection on the article for at least a week so that it would be helpful. Thanks, krZna (talk) 03:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Not all IP edits are vandalism, and there aren't that many to boot. If the problems persist, please relist. Lectonar (talk) 09:11, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Edit-warring by dynamic ip's since Dec 31 without any corresponding objections in the discussions on the talk page. --Ronz (talk) 22:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've warned the current offending editor here. I'm not sure if protection is needed yet; I'd lean towards promoting discussion (one which the IP may not have been aware of), so I'm unsure whether or not protection is needed now. I'll defer to another opinion on that matter Airplaneman ✈ 00:37, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined I agree with Airplaneman; also, the edit warring is rather slow, with only some reverts in a week. I'll add it to my watchlist. If the problems gets more persistent, please relist. Lectonar (talk) 08:52, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Incompetent/mischievous edits by unregisted users (often children it seems) are a long-term, almost daily occurence on this page, because of the wide appeal of its subject matter. Mezigue (talk) 09:30, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. One school dissing another? Jim1138 (talk) 07:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 08:31, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – vandalism started up again just after protection expired and the page has a high edit rate (so PC shouldn't be applied). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:09, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Consequent POV-pushing to get a negative view on organic milk. The Banner talk 18:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Only recently unprotected after an earlier conflict about the same matter. The Banner talk 19:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. STATic message me! 00:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continues Vandalism by ip's. Theman244 (talk) 23:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:24, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Sensitive topic; recent edits consist mostly of vandalism, reversion thereof, and minor changes. Fairly low volume of edits lately, so nothing worthy of semi-protection, but also no real downside of requiring review. (Any rekindled interest would just result in a heightened risk for BLP violations.). — Francophonie&Androphilie(Je vous invite à me parler) 23:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:28, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated insertion of poorly sourced content. Biker Biker (talk) 22:13, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I'm not seeing much straight-up vandalism; rather, I'm seeing a disagreement over content. Perhaps try discussion, and see what comes out of it. If that doesn't work, full protection can be considered. Airplaneman ✈ 22:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by anonymous users since BCS national championship game. . Niado (talk) 19:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:57, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism since January 1, 2013 in association with speculation associated with transfer to Liverpool F.C.. Rgds, - Trident13 (talk) 19:13, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 96 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:59, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Ips have returned to take up the edit-warring for which the article was last protected in May. See Talk:Planogram#Edit-warring_by_ips for full details. --Ronz (talk) 18:08, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There has been one suspicious edit in the past two weeks; the others seem harmless. If it picks up, re-request. Airplaneman ✈ 23:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This page is constantly used by some unregistered users for advertising purposes. They use it to advertise their shops, religious interests or coaching classes etc. I have removed their information from this article many times but they again put it back. Please protect it immediately to stop it from vandalism. Garvit (talk) 18:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Airplaneman ✈ 23:02, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Regular IP vandalism, virtually no helpful IP edits (have assumed good faith on some which may actually have been vandalism). Semi-protect for at least a month please. — Michaelmas1957 (talk) 17:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for 1 week, many unhelpful IP vandal edits that are BLP issues. JMHamo (talk) 16:39, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 48 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Seeing vandalism by IPs 86.99.2xx.xxx and User:Solara, among others. BollyJeff | talk 16:31, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: A high-profile article about a high-profile film, which has seen a lot of unexplained and unhelpful edits in just the past two days; protection is necessary in order to establish some stability and balance. The Old JacobiteThe '45 16:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, Not all edits seem to be unhelpful, and I think there is a net positive to be had from the new influx of contributions. Airplaneman ✈ 22:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated reinstatement of poorly presented and unsourced content by IPs and newly-registered accounts. This has been going on pretty much since the last semi in October 2012. Sitush (talk) 15:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Looks like a copyvio of [11]. Airplaneman ✈ 22:39, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. TBrandley (what's up) 22:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. DragonLeague (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) also salted. Airplaneman ✈ 22:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism (Preferably at least a month please). ARTPOPist (talk) 23:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. And not all of the IP edits are vandalism. Lectonar (talk) 12:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: this article is both semi and PC protected, could one of them be lifted please? I've informed both protecting admins. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{RFPP|u}} Removed PC protection as it was to expire first anyway. —Darkwind (talk) 04:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Still Semi-protected (procedural, for bot) Lectonar (talk) 10:02, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Requesting immediate archiving... Armbrust The Homunculus 22:55, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

12 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated unexplained content removal by multiple editors; apparent sock puppetry. Rivertorch (talk) 17:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 20:13, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High number of juvenile vandal edits on a popular research topic. A cool down period of two months is requested. HarryZilber (talk) 16:19, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 20:17, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – 150th birthday (i.e. 12 Jan). We have done 4-5 reverts today. The article will get a high traffic. Requesting a 3 days semi protection. Tito Dutta (talk) 22:18, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 20:37, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 21:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 20:34, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Constant genre wars have occurred a lot. Unsourced genre changes and genre warring.

2601:A:4100:5A:5C:6299:96AA:E9BC (talk) 20:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 20:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Consistent genre warring, removal of sourced material and replacing it with unsourced and Undiscussed stuff. Ignores signs saying NOT to do it. Persistent vandalism by IP editors

2601:A:4100:5A:5C:6299:96AA:E9BC (talk) 20:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 20:29, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Edit history since the 2nd (if not further back) is almost contant blanking/vandalism/BLP issues followed by reverts.  Mbinebri  talk ← 18:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 19:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: the page is constantly being transformed in a bad duplicate of Campo Largo, Paraná (they are doing the same in PT.WP).

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing vandalism by non-registered editors. Illia Connell (talk) 18:08, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected. Looks like the right measure for this kind of vandalism pattern. Favonian (talk) 19:45, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Once again, the talk page needs protection for IP vandalism. ZappaOMati 15:38, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator HJ Mitchell.. Looks like it's around a 3 hour protection. Airplaneman ✈ 17:03, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: - Smear campaign by IP.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:35, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:08, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – One band member tweeted a comment about the LBGT community that has been perceived as negative. Anonymous editors have been posting inappropriate editorialized statements about the event. There are no sources to back the notability of the event. A ten day lock for anon and new editors might help in reducing that sort of tendentious editing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:10, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 08:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editors are making POV edits about the status and sovereignty of Abkhazia. Bazonka (talk) 17:24, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 08:33, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: The page is somewhat of a magnet for fringe ideas by its very nature and all kinds of strange things happen there. Recent case is an IP who is less than coherent, refuses to even read WP:OR and thinks sources are by "uneducated authors" and keeps reverting or deleting text at will despite multiple users telling him he has no source. He even changes his own math when he realizes he had made subtraction errors in his OR... It is getting to be a comedy. This type of cycle is eating up time and running up frustration. Only Pending Changes will stop this type of thing on that page. History2007 (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 04:24, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Content dispute / Edit warring SwiperSE (talk) 16:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Darkwind (talk) 03:59, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:56, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Darkwind (talk) 03:45, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit war between Gabby Merger and ReformedArsenal. I'm a neutral party, having come here from a listing made at Third Opinion. TransporterMan (TALK) 16:30, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 04:06, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Sockpuppetry from User:Croonerman, Ip 71.232.51.112 and new account User:301bNYC. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:00, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 03:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Edit warring by IPs in contravention to established consensus on talk page. This has been a long term problem, including personal attacks. . Qwyrxian (talk) 14:17, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 03:53, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

13 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Article seems to be experiencing escalating vandalism lately, both from Ips and newly registered vandalism only accounts. Heiro 19:53, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected 2 weeks. Nev1 (talk) 20:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Every time this disambiguation page is unprotected an IP editor comes and places a huge tranche of text in it about some arcane sport or event. It looks as if the page itself is the target of some fools who think it's a game to wreck a disambiguation page. The sport or event or whatever looks so obscure as not to warrant its own page. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:28, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 99 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 19:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and persistent vandalism, please protect this article. Soundwaweserb (talk) 13:54, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 3 months. Nev1 (talk) 20:44, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – Vandalism following handling of todays match. Blethering Scot 17:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Pending changes would have been a poor choice given the edit frequency. --j⚛e deckertalk 18:48, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree given the increase of edits since i requested it.Blethering Scot 18:49, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, yeah, I did have the benefit of time.  :) --j⚛e deckertalk 19:28, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection High level of inappropriate IP editing following publication by Burchill of controversial article. See here. Alexbrn talk|contribs|COI 15:21, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. BLP issues.--j⚛e deckertalk 19:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP edit warring against consensus. LlamaAl (talk) 12:52, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please check the edits this guy is changing. I have provided the most reliable source possible and he continues to undo them without reason.

YouTube is not a reliable source. WP:MMA use what Sherdog.com says, and that was the offcicial result announced by the UFC. --LlamaAl (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 19:21, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Part of a multi-article persistent campaign. Involved editors are in many cases autoconfirmed. Tgeairn (talk) 08:08, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by Airplaneman (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (7 days). tutterMouse (talk) 15:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP edit warring against consensus. LlamaAl (talk) 12:52, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please check the edits this guy is changing. I have provided the most reliable source possible and he continues to undo them without reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.102.148.165 (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he provided a reliable source, but the offcial result announced by the UFC and published by the MMA media was rib injury. --LlamaAl (talk) 00:25, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Which I have shown is false... If the official record of JFK's assassination was he got stabbed and then video of him getting shot came out would we not be allowed to change it? Are you for real? Just admit you are wrong... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.102.148.165 (talk) 05:35, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Not a word of talk page discussion since 2009? Try the discussion page, folks. --j⚛e deckertalk 19:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: This page continues to be attacked by non-registered users since it was linked to from a popular forum and should be locked until activity from the forum thread cools down. NJM2010 (talk)

Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 19:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection IP editors have been removing an image they (or he/she) object to, without discussion ot edit summary. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:17, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected by Qwyrxian. tutterMouse (talk) 12:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – constant vandalism attacks since two days. Denniss (talk) 04:22, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:26, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – "In-redeemable" IP users keep vandalizing the page, despite numerous efforts to redeem them. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I'm seeing more than just vandalism from anonymous users. I think protection would lock many out of contributing positively to the page. Airplaneman ✈ 01:08, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Everybody needs to calm the fuck down; these people need to be forced to use the talkpage. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 22:47, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Barek.. KTC (talk) 00:40, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Page was semi protected for a long time due to previous vandalism. Once expired vandalism has returned. Requesting long term pending changes. Blethering Scot 22:16, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. KTC (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Three times in last three days anon coming from various IPs has added Muslim honorifics contrary to MOS Islam and added a particular Sufi lineage that is not in any way referenced, and is one of many. Clear attempt to exalt one lineage at the expense of others. Semi-protection should be enough to stop the anon. I hope. Zora (talk) 05:48, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:51, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism returned after the 2 week semi-protection expired. Forgot to put name 05:25, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:48, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – No point in having PC as edits aren't helpful. JayJayWhat did I do? 01:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:44, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant addition of claim that someome replying to a tweet with the word cheers means that several people support a 5 an amateur side football team that according to its own twitter feed cant find anyone to play against. No response to attempts to communicate via talk page of article and one ip poster that appears static, other ip posters are on dynamic ip addresses. [12] appears to show they are trying to spam wikipedia. noq (talk) 01:25, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:41, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism, encouraged by this tumblr post with over 10,000 notes that points out a joke entry. Various IPS have been re-adding the unsourced material over the past few days. AD (talk) 23:37, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection Constant vandalism. Just check the history for this month alone, and see how many times cluebot had to revert something, there other vandalism from IP reverted by users as well. Doesn't seem like this problem is likely to end ever. Some IPs may make legitimate edits, or perhaps innocent mistakes, but most of them are just vandals. Dream Focus 22:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

14 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: IPs pre-empting a football transfer and associated general vandalism, 100+ non-constructive edits in last day or so. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Block Evasion by User:Oaktreebay currently blocked for socking now using Anon Ip [[13]] which has identical edits [[14]]. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP socks of user:MalesAlwaysBest. Darkness Shines (talk) 08:19, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: IP hopping spammer.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:48, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done: Added two sites to spam blacklist. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mathonius (talk) 04:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous vandalism. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 10:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and tag blanking.--GoShow (............................) 02:54, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 10:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: repeated changing of proper formatting/prose and addition of non-NPOV intricate detail. Other Side One (talk) 02:35, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Please use the article's talk-page to hash it out. Lectonar (talk) 10:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – huge number of IP vandals today. — raekyt 02:11, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 10:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: - Persistant vandalism by IP users. Euchrid (talk) 02:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary protection: Constant changing of materials by IP users and new editors that while are true based on my experience in the subway, are unsourced and unveriable. Fan forums and YouTube are not reliable sources. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 10:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary protection for the same reason as the above request. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 10:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Yoda1893 (talk) 17:54, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Seems to have died down; if necessary, please relist. And if the vandalism comes from the same, few IP's (s in this case), a vandalism warning should be given, so this can be dealt with at AIV. This is usually more effective. Lectonar (talk) 10:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mattythewhite (talk) 15:52, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – repeatedly used for advertising. FrankDev (talk) 03:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 03:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mathonius (talk) 01:46, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 72 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semiprotection, recent uptick in POV/OR edits by variable IP addresses. Dl2000 (talk) 01:39, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mathonius (talk) 01:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Billinghurst.. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:56, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes, long term. Vandalism isn't frequent, but it's a magnet for griefers, and it's unlikely that non-autoconfirmed users will make constructive changes to a WP page. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Since there are no good edits at all for a good while by IPs, I semi'd it. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP vandalism, BLP & BDP violations (re Swartz himself, and the prosecutor in his trial), and even some racism (misplaced racism at that). 20,000 page views today. I think semi should only be necessary for a few days, and then we can downgrade to pc1. — Francophonie&Androphilie(Je vous invite à me parler) 00:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The one IP has been blocked, and it appears to be calming down for now. Refile as necessary. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

semi protection persistant IP disruptive comments about BLP weight -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:33, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:07, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary move protection: user:robbierangers keeps moving the page to a potential new name for the stadium but refuses to provide sources and jsut moves it anyway and then it has to be moved back.. the user has been blocked for similar things in the past. Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 23:03, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. This happened a long time ago. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:10, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent IP vandalism, BLP page. The Interior (Talk) 22:47, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is a frequently vandalized article. Since September, it has been vandalized over 10 times. አቤል ዳዊት (Janweh) (talk) 22:21, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The page keeps getting vandalized. GleekVampire | talk! 21:43, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Adding unsourced controvesial content. Eyesnore (talk) 21:41, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. persistent vandalism attempting to claim magazine is aimed solely at "Whilte" women, without source or evidence. RandomAct(talk to me) 21:09, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Gogo Dodo.. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from one registered Wikipedia user who is constantly changing the section "Lyrics" of that article. I am the user that originally added that section following the verified online source. 213.103.160.120 (talk) 20:11, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:24, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: IP is incoherent on talk and unless Pending change protected will drag right into an edit war based on self-published book (verified by 2 editors) as recently self-published. Needs PC. History2007 (talk) 19:40, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP misuse of the article as a place to promote refferal links. Jan 13 12 Quassy.DE 17:46, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I see no helpful unconfirmed edits after pending changes was configured. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 16:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. PC will resume then after. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: We have been getting several edit requests. It would be nice if you change the protection to the pending changes instead. -- Taku (talk) 13:08, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Before the semi-protection it was hit frequently by vandalism, the edit count would be far too high to allow pending changes besides. tutterMouse (talk) 15:04, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not done Wikipedia:Pending changes indicates that it is preferred over semi-protection when edits are infrequent but with a high proportion of vandalism. The article on Wikipedia is guaranteed to attract a lot of vandalism so pending changes would probably not be effective. Nev1 (talk) 20:30, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined for the bot. tutterMouse (talk) 21:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Malaysian high level IP vandalism.--188.47.108.56 (talk) 09:35, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. One IP already blocked. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent changes by IPs to info box photograph to one of lower quality. Previous photo in use for some time. Four different IPs, each only making this one edit. Suspect sock puppet.--Dmol (talk) 07:54, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and addition of uncited material from various IPs. Related to the current situation with List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters and List of LGBT characters in film, radio, and TV fiction. AD (talk) 07:21, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Should keep them away for now. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Several Requests

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Persistent change of stats across airport articles of India by an IP. — Abhishek  Talk 07:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. See 61.17.16.0/21 for the block. Refile if further evasion from another range. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: Edit warring and possible single person editing from 3 different accounts. Reason - Today I made edits to article Geoffrey Edelsten. I stripped out unreliable references, added additional information, removed some information, and cleaned up the article to be more from a neutral point of view. A short time ago, User Matilda (who has made only one edit on December 3, 2012 and the last one before that was on June 23, 2012) reverts the content that I updated as being “too many edits at once.” Was not aware there was a rule about that but I left a comment on my talk page (in response to Matilda’s comment on my page that he/she reverted the content) stating that I was reverting it back and my reason why. I also left a comment on her/his talk page informing them that there was a message on my page. At that time, I saw that this editor was “retired”, a previous admin, and had also been investigated for sockpuppetry.
4 minutes after I restored my edits, user WWGB came and reverted back to Matilda’s revert stating that he/she agreed that there were “too many contentious edits at one time” and that they smelled a “PR campaign.” WWGB was active editing on January 13, 2013 but their last edit was almost 4 hours before the edit made to the article. This seems to close to be anything but a single person using two accounts or two people who are someohow communicating with each other to have made these edits so close together when they weren’t even here at the same time. I left a message on the talk page of WWGB telling him/her that it was not a PR campaign and to check the neutrality of the article.
About 10 minutes later the edits were again reverted by a user named Orderinchaos whose last edit was on January 6, 2013. So, this editor just happened to be on Wikipedia to revert this edit within minutes of the other three? This doesn’t make sense. There is something fishy with these three, the spacing of their edits, and their persistence to revert my edits without even checking what I edited.
Reverting the edit would have be bright lined for being blocked for edit warring. I believe this person (or persons) know that which is why they used separate accounts to revert my edits. I would request that page protection be placed on the article until they discuss the issue with my edits other than being “too many.” NikoVee (talk) 06:56, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with page protection at the last uncontested version while this matter is sorted out. It would not be appropriate to protect the page with the controversial edits of the new editor included. As one example of that editor's bias, any mention of the subject's incarceration was removed from the recent major edit. WWGB (talk) 07:07, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If there are controversial edits, please move the discussion to the talk page. The only thing that is controversial (as stated in the many reversals of my edits) is that there were too many. Not sure how that qualifies as controversial. And, that is "newer" editor, not "new" editor. I am familiar with how to edit a Wiki from using other Wikis so although I do not have many edits, I am pretty sure that I have more experience than most people here. --NikoVee (talk) 07:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
brand new user made substantial edits to a previously contentious page. I was alerted to those changes because of an orphaned image notification on my talk page. Hence my emergence from retirement. --Matilda talk 08:14, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heard it already. "new user, new user, new user." I believe I have already covered that in great detail in other locations. Not sure why you keep trying to discredit me by stating such, but I guess that is how you work. REGARDLESS, I would like to withdraw the request for page protection. Despite having a complete opposite point of view about the article in question, I do not believe that there will be any further edit warring. The edits have ceased on the article and the discussion has been started on the talk page and the neutral point of view noticeboard. --NikoVee (talk) 09:00, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: There does seem to be a pause in the edit war, if you folks can work this out on the talk page that would be preferable to page protection. Thanks. --j⚛e deckertalk 19:47, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined withdrawn. --j⚛e deckertalk 00:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing content disputes/edit-warring involving multiple autoconfirmed editors. Tgeairn (talk) 06:40, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further review, it appears that the primary problem editors are not autoconfirmed, so Semi-protection would be a viable option. --Tgeairn (talk) 06:43, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. by Anomie per request. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Until this Twitter thing blows over. A few days max. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 06:32, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Withdrawn Looks like the vandalism is going to stop and I've got this watchlisted. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 01:43, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Unsubstantiated rumors of 'death', likely a hoax/vandalism. . SFK2 (talk) 04:30, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 44 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Didn't this fellow just come off protection last month? --j⚛e deckertalk 20:04, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly did, you protected it. tutterMouse (talk) 22:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that later, and laughed.  :) --j⚛e deckertalk 00:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Edit warring + possible sock-puppetry. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 00:20, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This appears to be an edit war with no consensus solved out. Therefore I can not rule in favor of one party or another. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – One IP keeps vandalizing. Protect until the IP is blcoked. TheMesquito (talk) 23:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Please try WP:AIV next time. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:56, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: - An IP keeps adding a section about Israel even though the consensus is that it should be removed. They have discussed some on the talk page but seem happy to ignore everyone. They've been reverted several times already during the past week. CodeCat (talk) 14:15, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Please try WP:AIV next time. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP edit warring against consensus. LlamaAl (talk) 12:52, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please check the edits this guy is changing. I have provided the most reliable source possible and he continues to undo them without reason.
Is YouTube a reliable source? WP:MMA use what Sherdog says. And that was the official result announced by the UFC. --LlamaAl (talk) 00:22, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, yes it is... it's extremely reliable!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.102.148.165 (talk) 05:31, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Reliable source examples#Are IRC, MySpace, Facebook, and YouTube reliable sources?. Armbrust The Homunculus 00:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. But it looks to have stopped for now. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 03:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Procedural, for the bot. Lectonar (talk) 10:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism. The new receipt of a death hoax.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 22:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: per WP:HRT, before this there are undetected vandalism by IP users. — иz нίpнόp ʜᴇʟᴘ! 13:10, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: 15 transclusions Airplaneman ✈ 14:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined I've mixed feelings about this, some nonsense stayed in this template for quite a long time. This is countered by a very small number of transclusions and offending edits. I'm not convinced the problem will recur. --j⚛e deckertalk 19:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is a high profile MMA article, please semi-protect till at least the end of 2013. ✍ Mtking ✉ 09:02, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: : User(s) blocked. by Gilliam --j⚛e deckertalk 18:57, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

15 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term BLP vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 20:19, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: I would like for my userpage to be semi-protected. There is no need for ip/new editors to edit and there has been some vandalism in the page. Especially with the area I work in (vandalism-reversion) there are quite a few vandals who will go to the reverter's userpage and vandalize it. Vacation9 19:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. AlexiusHoratius 19:40, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite move protection: Hello, I would like to have both my user page and user talk page to be fully move protected. No reason for anyone to be moving it anyways. ~TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:58, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. AlexiusHoratius 19:24, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The User Talk page has not been move protected. Vacation9 19:48, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Quite right. Now done by two of us. AlexiusHoratius 19:55, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't it be fully move protected? Lectonar reduced it to semi-move protection for some reason. Vacation9 20:08, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. AlexiusHoratius 20:14, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – joke page about non-notable student. Altered Walter (talk) 19:32, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected indef. AlexiusHoratius 19:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP editor adds potenyially offence material without source or reference . Murry1975 (talk) 19:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 19:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| confabulate _ 17:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Inflation by IP users. Been going on for a long long time now.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 15:07, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ‑Scottywong| speak _ 17:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Many BLP issues from IPs, please protect for a period of 1 week. JMHamo (talk) 13:41, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ... see below. Lectonar (talk) 13:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for a period of 1 week. Many unhelpful IP edits. JMHamo (talk) 13:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I hope transfers will be done by then....Lectonar (talk) 13:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: This redirect is having another article copy and pasted into it to create a fork and in violation of copyright policy. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It's one editor, better to take action against them. GedUK  12:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. In fact, I've blocked them. GedUK  12:49, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: This redirect is having another article copy and pasted into it creating a fork and in violation of the copyright policy. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It's one editor, better to take action against them. GedUK  12:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. In fact, I've blocked them. GedUK  12:49, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IPs inflating sales with unreliable sources. — Oz 12:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:52, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Recent rape allegations involving some of his students (NOT involving Irvin himself) has evidently incited a high level of rape-related IP vandalism, particularly regarding poorly or uncited additions of a 1990 rape case that may or may not involve this particular Lloyd Irvin. Buddy23Lee (talk) 06:03, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Ongoing for almost a week, so I'll protect for two weeks. I am unconvinced that this is vandalism and that the sources don't refer to this particular subject, but considering the implications of potential false rape allegations in a BLP, I'll err on the side of caution and apply SPP; however I hope this'll see more discussion on the talk page. Salvidrim! ✉ 06:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you sir. I agree it looks quite probable, but obviously these things should be well cited. Hopefully the two weeks will give enough time to discover any further sources that might help establish or disprove the 1990 case. Buddy23Lee (talk) 06:21, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite move protection: No reason for this to be moved. Forgot to put name 05:53, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. As of now, as you've stated, there is no reason to move nor to prevent moving. The last move-vandalism goes back to May'12. Salvidrim! ✉ 05:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection. Content dispute. I don't know if there is a consensus to include her in the LGBT categories. Relevant discussion at Talk:Jodie_Foster#Edit_dispute.3F. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator LadyofShalott. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 06:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – for unsourced/false info . Digifan23 (talk) 00:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. ‑Scottywong| chat _ 03:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: it seems someone has (or a couple of people at once have) picked this article to vandalise over the last couple of days. Is the subject of regular random vandalism (given pop culture references to it) but vandalism yesterday/today has been particularly enthusiastic. It seems they are also starting to work out what might be automatically reverted and what needs to be manually reverted and so are moving to the latter. A couple of days should do it - just to move them along. Stalwart111 22:30, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - Today's "spree" has lasted exactly 4 edits, over 8 minutes, from a narrow range of two close IPs for which a block could've been preferable. There was no vandalism yesterday and no other recent recurrent vandalism. Salvidrim! ✉ 02:58, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP disruption. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: There's a popular livestreaming show where the host (named "Day[9]") mentioned about "editing the Calvin cycle wikipedia article to contain his name", so, some of the watchers are trying to do it, vandalizing the article constantly. I suggest it to be locked for a day or two. BrunoAssis (talk) 03:49, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 03:55, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: vandalism, especially WP:BLP violations. NiciVampireHeart 03:45, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 04:03, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Vandalism – Howard told his listeners to vandalize his staff's page today. Shark96z (talk · contribs) 03:27, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Should be enough for it to die down. Salvidrim! ✉ 03:35, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations. Webclient101talk 03:25, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 03:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Someone appears to be using a variety of IP addresses to attack this page. Some of the edits are nasty (e.g., [15]). RockMagnetist (talk) 01:25, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| communicate _ 03:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent edit warring, on a very minor issue and a refusal to enter in to any form of discussions. Sport and politics (talk) 01:14, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| spill the beans _ 03:12, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The series is highly popular, and the article has been having a flood of IP users changing cast members around. I've been attempting to revert most of it but when I'm not at my desktop, there they are again reverting. . Recollected (talk) 23:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| squeal _ 03:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continued vandalism by multiple IPs; seems like every other edit is vandalism. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 22:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Courcelles 02:34, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: US Attorney prosecuting the late Aaron Shwartz. Three BLP violations (I argue objectively so), perhaps five, in the past three hours from at least three IPs. I've added a 5-day semi=protection myself, but request immediate review of that protection by an admin who hasn't touched the article, and I'll walk away from the article in any case. --j⚛e deckertalk 22:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Courcelles 02:33, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mathonius (talk) 20:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Recurrent vandalism from wide IP range for a few days now. Salvidrim! ✉ 02:50, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism. Nearly daily attacks. አቤል ዳዊት (Janweh) (talk) 00:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 18 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:48, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: News about this high-profile company entering administration has emerged this evening, numerous unsourced edits from IP's are being made and one instance of vandalism. Half past formerly SUFCboy 21:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 22:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Large amounts of vandalism and a controversial topic, obviously. There are some good contribs in there though. Vacation9 20:55, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated removal of sourced content; edit warring by multiple IPs; no one is using the talk page. Rivertorch (talk) 20:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: I would like to make it so I don't have IP addresses editing my page. Scientific Alan 2 (talk) 18:56, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Dan56 (talk) 18:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 18:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – IPs adding unconfirmed and unsourced transfer speculation. Mr tim111 (talk) 17:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Protection urgently needed due to high levels of IP vandalism. Frogging101 (talk) 16:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. --palmiped |  Talk  15:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 15:52, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, over a long period of time. Current flare-up is a repeat of edits made last month. Most edits are unsourced, vandalism and/or deletion of sourced content, with ensuing reversions. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 13:39, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. As you say, these are flare-ups, easily reverted. I'll watchlist too. Lectonar (talk) 15:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – Ongoing story about the name "GAA" in the title. To GAA or not to GAA is a neutrality issue, sparked by the case of Derry GAA. Related to the wider Northern-Ireland case. The Banner talk 13:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined the most recent move and re-move was conducted by an admin, so protection wouldn't have achieved anything. Beyond that there doesn't seem to be a move war happening. GedUK  15:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for 1 week. Many unhelpful BLP issues from IPs due to a proposed move to Spain. JMHamo (talk) 13:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – IP editors massively adding unsourced transfer speculation over the last few days. Might as well semi-protect instead. – Kosm1fent 11:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 11:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: I'm requesting for unprotection because the last protecting administrator is no longer active. 96.247.79.136 (talk) 02:16, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to ask for the IP to give a reason, but, taking a glance at the logs, I very much see a case for unprotection: The article was protected four years ago with the summary "enough of this cousin stuff" - which definitely sounds like the sort of rationale that will not remain relevant after four years. Incidentally, it's been move-protected ever since Grawp hit it a few months before that, but I wonder if it's only that twist of fate that spared the community from years of "S." vs. "S" edit wars. But the semi-protection, at least, I think would be worth removing to see what happens. — Francophonie&Androphilie(Je vous invite à me parler) 17:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That is sort of my take too. I'll boldy unprotect for edit, leave move protection in place (middle initial, speaking as another fellow with a one-letter middle name), and let's keep an eye on it. --j⚛e deckertalk 18:37, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unprotected (I left move protection intact.) --j⚛e deckertalk 18:40, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, just to say that I routinely maintain the article because I was a nominator with PumpkinSky at FAC (whom I think the OP is referring to). I remain active, hopefully. No objection to the unprotection, and we'll see how it goes.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:47, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thanks. And (of course) don't hesitate to reprotect it it turns out to be warranted. --j⚛e deckertalk 18:53, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

16 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: IP's keep changing Bayern Munich's current manager to Pep Guardiola, who doesn't take over officially until the summer. Fallschirmjäger ✉ 18:22, 16 January 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 100 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Also Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I know this seems like an unusual protection, but my theory is that things should calm down within the next 4-5 days to the point where PC can take over until closer to the time when this Pep guy takes over. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Anons and new accounts seem to love this page. Arsenal fans come here to vent about him leaving. Other football fans come to execute other nonconstructive edits. This page has been temporarily locked for anon & new several times over the year, and it seems that a more permanent locking is in order. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:06, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let's try pending changes on it and if the ratio of constructive to non-constructive IP/new user edits is too skewed it can always be changed to semi-protection. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP violation ongoing. Also revdelete one of the recent edits. Thanks.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:01, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit revdel'd and Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Reports that Kelly has accepted the head coaching job with the Eagles will cause repeated insertion of unverified and unofficial rumors that are represented as official facts. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 17:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Eagles247.. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Satellizer talk contribs 04:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| spill the beans _ 18:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection. Numerous attempts to redirect to different topics. It has been discussed many times 1 2 3 4, and there is no place to redirect to, other than a disambiguation page. 117Avenue (talk) 04:22, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirecting to a disambiguation page is probably not the best solution, as the articles are about different definitions of the same place, but the undiscussed changes have to stop. Maybe a discussion could be started and the page protected with an edit summary providing a link to the discussion. Peter James (talk) 12:45, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Started a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2013_January_16#Halifax.2C_Nova_Scotia. ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 18:18, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The editor who was editwarring is now blocked for sockpuppetry, protection is no longer needed. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism in the last week. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 17:44, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 18:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection again Previous protection implemented on January 2, 2013 that ended on the 6th has not changed the behavior in editing the article. The editors involved at the end of Talk:Self-determination should be separated from interaction with each-other officially. Lets lock this page-up again. Moxy (talk) 23:49, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Users also warned on their talk pages. ‑Scottywong| squeal _ 17:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection: IP blanking of the only referenced section, a needed example. This is a continuation of persistent IP-stalker behavior. See Mean squared error. Attleboro (talk) 22:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Attleboro is a sockpuppet of User:Mbhiii / User:Welhaven / User:Trift, User:Ritterhude, User:Somedifferentstuff, 72.37.249.60 and a large number of other IP's and likes to place their synthesis and WP:OR into articles. 108.101.219.229 (talk) 23:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that is the case, I suggest you collect some evidence and open a case at sockpuppet investigations. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 17:48, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism since the last protection was over. Oleola (talk) 11:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month this time, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Continued IP vandalism, new vandals regularly, very few constructive edits by unregistered users. Article traffic is app. 5000 views per day (3575th most popular article as of January 15 2013. Jklamo (talk) 10:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism by anon IP's coming in about once an hour. 787 issues are becoming big news and vandalism is sure to escalate. Marteau (talk) 07:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Rjd0060 (talk) 10:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism resumed once protection expired. —Ryulong (琉竜) 03:49, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:05, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and addition of unsourced rumors. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 02:22, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection Persistent vandalism from user with dynamic IP addresses. Peter James (talk) 23:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: The page had been protected before and has recently been unprotected. I would like to request to be semi-protected until April 2, 2012 (same length as the Lostprophets page) as that's when results will be likely to be cleared. The results of custody is set to March 11, 2013. But during those time period it's likely to be vandalised (again) just like before. Mr. Washee Washee (talk) 11:19, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. No vandalism since the protection expired. This is on my watchlist (and I'm not the only admin with this on my watchlist) and I'll happily reprotect if the silliness returns. If I don't, come back here and / or ping me on my talk page if I'm active at the time. BencherliteTalk 11:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: today's Google Doodle is sending a huge amount of traffic to this page and it has become a target for vandalism - this should not be a problem after today. Jmackaerospace (talk) 10:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a need to protect it at this time. There is a lot of traffic, yes - but it's not all counterproductive. I'll leave the request for another admin to decide though. Rjd0060 (talk) 11:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator Gilliam.. Protected for a week. Airplaneman ✈ 14:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editor has been edit warring on the page since as far back as July 2012. Been reverted by several dozen editors since then. Someone's not getting the point (even after his IP assignment changed). —Ryulong (琉竜) 07:37, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Multiple and persistent IP vandalism of controversial topic.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - I see only three vandals since 21-Dec'12, which isn't enough to warrant SPP at this time. Some measure of vandalism is to be expected on such broad, high-traffic politico-social topics; it can be (and is) reverted and ignored. I see no great increase recently that would justify protecting an article that has been unprotected since 2005. Salvidrim! ✉ 03:20, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked – Extreme edit warring with other editors. Eyesnore (talk) 02:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 02:31, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Sockpuppet target. No reason for non-autoconfirmed users to edit. — Francophonie&Androphilie(Je vous invite à me parler) 02:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Berean Hunter. (indefinitely) --Webclient101talk 03:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Carlos Latuff (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – repeated vandalism/harrassment by an IP editor (same person, multiple IP), main article had to be protected against this user a short time ago. Denniss (talk) 00:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 02:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continued IP vandalism over recent gun control legislation. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 22:48, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Peak of recent multi-IP BLP vandalism. Salvidrim! ✉ 22:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Page protection lifted and the anon vandals visit. As requested initially, a month would be nice. Six months wouldn't be unreasonable. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 21:52, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Psychonaut (talk) 20:49, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

17 January 2013

Indefinite full move and semi edit protection: Per consensus at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#A7, this sub-template of {{db-a7}} has been created, whose protection level should be consistent with its parent (last done here. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected and full Move protected. --j⚛e deckertalk 15:12, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: - edit warring Transerd (talk) 14:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Please observe 3RR in the future, I think it's arguable you both passed it. --j⚛e deckertalk 14:59, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for a period of 2 weeks, many BLP issues from IPs that need reverting. JMHamo (talk) 09:51, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'm not seeing the BLP issues, but there is enough vandalism, as well as (I'm guessing here) general insertion of the oh-so-typical trade rumors. Given that and the previous history of vandalism.... --j⚛e deckertalk 15:22, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: crucial article, childish IP users effortlessly vandalize it. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:59, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 14:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Sudden surge of vandal activity here. It's out of control with nonsense everywhere on the page, I don't know which version to rv to. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 12:59, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 14:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: I have requested this for semi-protection before! High level of vandalism again. Whitetararaj (talk) 13:55, 17 January 2013 (AST)

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 14:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Gurjinder Romana 10:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 14:01, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Manti Te'o had a "Catfish" type story, so IP users have taken it upon themselves to include his situation into the series episode guide. I'm requesting protection until the story blows over. Recollected (talk) 03:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - Feel free to come back if you deem it needing reprotection at the end of the current protection. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 14:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Continued IP vandalism, Please read through to discover the type of vandalism specially in the history area. Temporary protection not working (protected once for 20 days) Vandals are back again. Please make the page semi-protected so that no one can edit without responsibility.Esha Karim (talk) 16:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. extended for another 1 month ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 14:05, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long time disruptive IP edits (please check first 500 edits), requesting either indefinite semi protection or Pending changes protection. . Tito Dutta (talk) 21:01, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. MikeLynch (talk) 10:31, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Tito Dutta (talk) 10:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Multiple (similar) IPs repeatedly blanking large sections and re-adding poorly worded OR. Rivertorch (talk) 10:45, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MikeLynch (talk) 10:44, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands

I am looking for help here, I believe Wiki should be the most unbiased info source here. However, the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senkaku_Islands is currently highly biased towards the Japanese position. There is huge demand to change the title of the page to a more natural name such as Pinnacle Islands rather than either Diaoyu or Senkaku as currently the dispute is taking place.

However the page has been locked and nearly all requests for rebalancing the POVs have been rejected. If you are looking at the admin list who have changed this article since protected, it's overwhelmed by people having a Japanese background/culture. How could this be regarded as unbiased? The Blade of the Northern Lights speaks Japanese, Hoary is clearly a Japanese (or culture fan), Nihonjoe is a Japanese, Phoenix7777 is a Japanese (or Fan, look the photos in his homepage), Kwamikagami is clearly a Japanese name, Qwyrxian lives in Japan. Kezhu2012 (talk) 12:55, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) This just in: Admins from Japan or interested in Japanese culture often work on articles about Japan. I have no clue if what you're requesting is or isn't the legitimate consensus, but it's almost never a good idea to assign affiliations, identities, or biases to other editors, unless you're actually making a case against them for POV editing. Incidentally, Kawami and Phoenix aren't admins, so you can be sure that they haven't edited the article since it was full-protected. — Francophonie&Androphilie(Je vous invite à me parler) 21:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Suggesting that admins won't be able to judge neutrally because of their national origin or current residence is not a good way to start a discussion here. The suggestion may reflect poorly on the requester. Should we ask you what country you are from before we agree to listen to your arguments? In the past the Senkaku Islands have been the subject of angry debate. The current state of these articles reflects the result of discussions going on since 2003 and won't be lightly overturned. Take a look at WP:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Senkaku Islands. User:Qwyrxian has some background on this case and may be able to answer questions about it. EdJohnston (talk) 02:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Transgender sidebar

This template has had a paysite for shemales planted on it for weeks when I removed it and now an anon is re-adding it. Request indef semi-protection on a highly visible template please. Insomesia (talk) 02:43, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected For 1 month based on spam links. My sense is that its not visible enough to justify permanent protection, though if any admins disagree with me, feel free to set it. Monty845 02:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Level 2 pending changes Due to a unfolding news story regarding a rape that occurred in 2012 purportedly committed by members of the football team and subsequent involvement of the hacker group Anonymous, there is a high level of change in this article, much of it involving BLP issues and coming from registered users that I am supposing are students or associated in some other way with the school. The accused will be arraigned late next month. I am asking for protection at least thru February. Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – There is currently no consensus for use of pending changes level 2 on the English Wikipedia. KTC (talk) 23:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of completely declining, can you consider PC1? Ryan Vesey 00:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Page was placed under full protection by User:Kudpung on 3 Dec 2012 till 13 April 2013, due to edit warring. We've been having a lively but constructive discussion on the talk page about how to improve the article, specifically its lead section. Latest draft lead has been approved by people who took different views re earlier draft leads, and no-one has opposed the latest draft. So I have the sense that we're coming to a degree of consensus about how to improve the article. I contacted Kudpung yesterday here about unprotecting the article. Kudpung's reply was "no", on grounds of article's contentious history, but would not object to another administrator being asked to unprotect. Kalidasa 777 (talk) 01:42, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have to agree with Kudpung here, but I also lived near the inner German border for almost all of my life. Consensus might be there, but I would like to see more participation in the discussion. Perhaps time to get a WP:3rd opinion. Lectonar (talk) 10:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean a 3rd opinion about unprotecting, or about page content, or both? The more participation, the better, I suppose. But recent content discussion hasn't in any sense been a two-opinion thing... Kalidasa 777 (talk) 11:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Page content, and I did not want to imply it had been a 2-opinion thing. Just to get someone who is not too involved to have a look. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 11:24, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
How would we go about arranging that? Would you suggest I put a notice on the ANI page, asking for an uninvolved administrator to have a look? Kalidasa 777 (talk) 20:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You can try WP:3O. ‑Scottywong| spout _ 03:08, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestion. But as WP:3O says: "If more than two editors are involved, 3O is not appropriate." Right now there isn't a polarized content dispute between two editors, or even between two groups of editors. Actually the most recent draft lede, which was posted on the talk page about three days ago, has not received any substantial criticisms at all, only endorsements.Kalidasa 777 (talk) 04:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – After discussing this with User:Kudpung I'm declining to lift the protection. The people who are active on the talk page should consider submitting an edit request to change the lead. Such a consensus (if one can be found) would be a welcome change from the pattern up till now. EdJohnston (talk) 02:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism/link-spam. – RobinHood70 talk 23:31, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked main link-spamming IP and Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Individual has just now (within the last 1-2 hours) become subject of very damaging expose (see here) that will almost certainly lead to rash of problematic edits. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 22:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Content dispute, new editor has not engaged on talkpage. Murry1975 (talk) 22:06, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of four days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Current GA status being threatened by a trio of new accounts that are adding or removing information without consensus. A concern was raised over at WP:BLPN regarding this, and I think protection would be indicated until either an SPI determined if these accounts are related, or the modifications to the article are agreed upon by consensus. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 20:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note - SPI open. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 21:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
=P I just filed one of my own at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Title hero, and also User(s) blocked. and Fully protected for a period of five days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 21:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requesting "Pending changes protection", an IP editor has been making non-constructive edits in 1) Paoli Dam 2) this article. Both articles were semi-protected. In Paoli Dam article we had to semi protect the talk page of the article too and the article is now pending changes protected till 2014. Their persisting disruptive edits have been reported to admins. IP address range block was tried, that did not work. I am requesting pending changes protection in this article too! . Tito Dutta (talk) 17:48, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected until 2014. Normally I wouldn't do this but seeing as the article is otherwise quite stable I saw no harm in it. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:32, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! That is going to be helpful, I know this editor for a long time. So far he did not notice that the article has been unprotected. He'll be back soon now! --Tito Dutta (talk) 21:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Several editors keep changing Dan's birth year back and forth. There is a source. Tinton5 (talk) 23:32, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. ‑Scottywong| converse _ 17:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

18 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: The page has been protected before and has recently been hijacked once more by a single IP who has ignored a warning and is on the hop (the last address has seen numerical changes). Contributions by this user are nonconstructive in that they replace common English place names in Kosovo (eg. Pristina) with local names (ie. Prishtina) - several examples abound. The page has been overrun by IPs for many months and they need to learn to use the discussion page for proposed changes. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 19:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 20:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: - edit warring Transerd (talk) 17:59, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected'·Add§hore·' Talk To Me! 20:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Since India is having a diversified culture, the state related topics are introduced in the main topics. For Eg: The word 'Makara' for 'Makar' is used only in 1 or 2 states of India but the article was overall vandalise (AGF) with the word. Secondly, the article had texts (Mythological or a custom followed in a particular village / region & not overall country) without any references & hence had to be removed. Please consider the request for protection on priority. Ninney (talk) 14:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the festive mood isn't gone yet. I've Pending-changes protected it for 3 days, let's hope things cool down after that. MikeLynch (talk) 18:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: A recent spate of edits by SPAs have been removing valid maintenance templates and adding back spam/cruft. Talk page warnings appear to have gone unheeded. ukexpat (talk) 17:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? We now have three apparent sock/meat puppet SPAs making the same edits.--ukexpat (talk) 17:47, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 17:50, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Much obliged, thanks.--ukexpat (talk) 17:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Persistent vandalism – Please, I guess this LOL thing about the disgraced director and the propaganda aspect, which has been reiterated countless times by various anons, will not stop, unless it is fully protected. Look at the troll history. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 10:11, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. I have rangeblocked one attacking party. Re-report if they bypass the block. Materialscientist (talk) 13:06, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Edit warring IP. RashersTierney (talk) 03:42, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. GedUK  13:02, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Probably a better option. RashersTierney (talk) 13:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hop n hop (on the arctic ice) 16:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:35, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP vandalism. This page was semi protected January 9, 2013 for 1 week. As soon as the block was lifted, the same IP user persisted with the same vandalism as before, as seen here. These changes are unsourced (while the correct dates are) and have been a very recurring theme on this page, with this IP and ones very similar. -Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Dan56 (talk) 15:11, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 16:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism for several years, ramping up this past week. (Contrast with Robert Frost, seemingly vandalism-free.) Page has been semiprotected twice before. Choor monster (talk) 13:53, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 14:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – It was full-protected for one week and has been unprotected today, but, 1) no consensus has been made 2) I am fearing another edit warring may start since the problematic portion has been added again without discussion. Requesting a temporary page protection again until we reach consensus. Tito Dutta (talk) 04:37, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:07, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Tito Dutta (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Highly visible template – Many companies mentioned on Wikipedia that trade on Euronext, makes sense to protect alongside Template:NYSE. Fairly OddParents Freak (Fairlyoddparents1234) C 22:48, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment)Template:Euronext has 478 transclusions, probably not enough for full protection to be necessary but maybe semi. Template:NYSE has 907 and is a redirect which is unlikely to need editing, and the template it redirects to has more than 5,000 transclusions. Peter James (talk) 01:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC) Also many of the edits have been from non-administrators, and a few have been IP edits although not recently. The template has only been vandalised once and that was in 2008. Peter James (talk) 02:12, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Not high vis. I look for over 1000 at least. GedUK  12:45, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite protection: Page survived an AfD with the finding that it be merged; in the meantime it's an unsourced BLP, with persistent addition of unsourced content and copyright violations. Perhaps a simple redirect would suffice. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 22:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I've just redirected it. I'll watch, but relist if that's undone. GedUK  12:43, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This page contains all people who've got noble prize. And if this is vandalized this should be a disgrace for wikipedia. See the history, something happened which should not be happened. Pratyya (Hello!) 10:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. With no protection history, I can't go indef at this point. GedUK  13:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – This has been moved far too many times without discussion (I fully admit responsibility as the chief mover). Move-protection would force people to actually file a requested move and discuss how the name relates to WP:TITLEFORMAT. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour ♪ talk ♪ 07:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So it can be moved into the IncidentArchive space; this will make it searchable from the standard search box {{Administrators%27_noticeboard_navbox/Search}} NE Ent 14:26, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected GedUK  13:13, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for 2 weeks.. many BLP issues from IPs due to media rumours about a transfer to England. JMHamo (talk) 12:53, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 12:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article is currency PC protected but there are very few constructive edits by new users and IPs. Torreslfchero (talk) 12:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 13:00, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Jeb2003 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary full protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked – Continued Socking confirmed by checkuser, removing block template, attempting to change block length suggest temporary protection of talk page until end of block. Also it might be in good form to fully block talkpage access until block is finished, adjust this request to best practices as you see fit. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:33, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Full seems unnecceary at this point. GedUK  13:03, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Anon IP editor repeatedly coming in and making the same change, despite obvious consensus against it. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 00:49, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. SUch a long protection log, I think indef should be OK. GedUK  12:55, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – Moving the article is controversial and still in discussion. Still it was moved (and reverted). Please protect against moving till this wider discussion is finished. The Banner talk 13:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection was recently made for this page, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days. Snotbot  t • c »  13:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Object: this article on a football competition was moved, as were many others, away from its long-established common name, Connacht Under-21 Football Championship which is the complete and official title of the competition, without consensus or even discussion. I reverted that move and requested at the talk page that it not be moved without discussion and consensus. The requester reverted my revert, again placing the article under a title that does not correspond to its WP:COMMONNAME, and is now attempting to have that move protected. Rather than protect the moved title, I request that an admin revert this back to its proper place at Connacht Under-21 Football Championship and protect that page from further moves pending discussion. Brocach (talk) 13:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Move protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'm not prepared to muddy the waters by moving it back to it's 'proper' place, as it's not that simple. Move protection will suffice for the discussion, then it can be put where it needs to be. GedUK  12:36, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – Moving the article is controversial and still in discussion. Still it was moved (and reverted). Please protect against moving till this wider discussion is finished. The Banner talk 13:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Object: this article on a football competition was moved, as were many others, away from its long-established common name, Leinster Senior Football Championship which is the complete and official title of the competition, without consensus or even discussion. I reverted that move and requested at the talk page that it not be moved without discussion and consensus. The requester reverted my revert, again placing the article under a title that does not correspond to its WP:COMMONNAME, and is now attempting to have that move protected. Rather than protect the moved title, I request that an admin revert this back to its proper place at Leinster Senior Football Championship and protect that page from further moves pending discussion. Brocach (talk) 14:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Move protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'm not prepared to muddy the waters by moving it back to it's 'proper' place, as it's not that simple. Move protection will suffice for the discussion, then it can be put where it needs to be. GedUK  12:36, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Continued promotional edits by IPs associated with the company. "Pending changes" doesn't seem effective. --CliffC (talk) 03:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. When the semi has finished, the PC will recommence. If it needs protecting again after that then I suspect PC will have to come off. GedUK  12:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Webclient101talk 08:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already done by administrator Bsadowski1. - Torreslfchero (talk) 08:10, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism, not one IP edit which is productive.Lihaas (talk) 02:47, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. This is a recent article, and the situation might change, but the current IP activity does not justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 02:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: An IP editor is repeatedly changing Meldrum's year of birth from 1943 to 1946 despite the best evidence available being that he was born in 1943. The IP has already been reverted by a number of experienced editors but is continuing to engage in an edit war on the issue. Afterwriting(talk) 09:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've warned the IP user for edit warring, and noting their wording in edit summaries plus stopping at their 3rd revert, it's likely they know exactly what they're doing. Please report to WP:ANEW if this particular IP resumes edit warring, or re-request protection if it becomes more widespread. —Darkwind (talk) 20:29, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined So the bot will archive ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 02:19, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi protection: Content dispute/edit warring – IP disruption (blanking of content) for POV reasons. E4024 (talk) 20:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 01:29, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing problem with articles related to actor Cole Sprouse. Single edit accounts and IPs persistently changing actor's name to "Satan Sprouse" or "He who shall not be named". They've already had their fun at The Suite Life of Zack & Cody, which has been protected, and have moved onto this article. AussieLegend (✉) 04:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 01:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism on current event article.Lihaas (talk) 00:21, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 02:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 23:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 02:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 01:07, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of five months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:13, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations. Webclient101talk 01:03, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. StringTheory11 (t • c) 00:27, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: My list of my pages tagged with speedy deletion may be vandalized excessively. Eyesnore (talk) 22:27, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 22:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 23:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP massively inflating the number of inhabitants of Sarajevo, in conflict with the source given. IP did this 3 times in last 5 days, so semi-protection of max 2 weeks should be enough to spoil the fun. The Banner talk 20:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 01:15, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-hopper edit warring to include copyrighted material. Elizium23 (talk) 19:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 01:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Transfer speculation. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 01:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

semi protection/pending revision - the article for Dual Survival has been placed under "pending revisions" due to BLP violations about one of the former cast members. For some reason until now, the stand alone article about the former cast member had been largely ignored, but now that article is getting repeated attacks, too. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:12, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 01:19, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent, high level of IP vandalism by numerous IPs. At least 90% of latest 50 edits reverted; most of previous 500 edits reverted, although some are flagged as "good faith" reverts. ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 18:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 01:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated – This article has been G4'd three times in the last six months. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected indef. AlexiusHoratius 01:23, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent, high level of IP vandalism by numerous IPs 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 15:47, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 01:25, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The page is now unprotected and random IPs are adding abuse to the page and making other changes like deleting content. . Ashermadan (talk) 11:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Insufficient vandalism since unprotection (The editor you're disagreeing with over poll awards appears at User_talk:The_Awards_Specialist#Poll_Awards to be discussing the matter, making that a content dispute, not vandalism.) --j⚛e deckertalk 15:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Vandalism by IPs-- Alireza Talk 17:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 23:24, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unprotection: un-semi my talk page to communicate with newer editors, I think the IP abuse from the pass ended. Secret account 19:24, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected I left the move protection on but enabled IP/unconfirmed editing. Does that work for you? --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 21:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

19 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:33, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected – Two months. IPs have been adding negative material to a WP:BLP article based on questionable sources. EdJohnston (talk) 19:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Consistent, promotional non-sourced edits are being made to this page by ip editors. While the majority of edits are promotional, some ip edits are perfectly acceptable. PC would alleviate some of these issues.   little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  16:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. It looks a lot more like you, the IPs, and STATicVersatide have a content dispute.
STATicVersatide, please don't refer to other editors' good-faith edits as vandalism either. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Pratyya (Hello!) 14:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) I can't see any vandalism at all. Torreslfchero (talk) 15:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. No vandalism at all has occurred. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Consistent IP vandalism over a number of months now --Tacita620 (talk) 19:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:24, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism in figures and ratings and verdict by different IP users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anidemun (talk • contribs) 18:40, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:23, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 17:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:21, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Persistant unsourced selfpromo. The Banner talk 16:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:56, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. — Cirt (talk) 12:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations. Vacation9 18:14, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:36, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: There was a failed assassination attempt on him recently, which is attracting a lot of ip vandals. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2013 (UTC)Requesting[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article on India's former Prime Minister has a long time disruptive edit history. The worst part is sometimes defamatory or controversial or sensitive information added in the article (calling Indian former Prime Minister tyrant or POV pushing). Requesting semi protection OR pending changes protection). Tito Dutta (talk) 15:44, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 16:23, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:37, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-protection: Article has undergone several months of protection with increasing lengths of protection. (Protection log). A1candidate (talk) 11:56, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP plug-unplug vandal persisting on BLP by making slight and racist change to description regarding subject's mother. Nate • (chatter) 11:55, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 16:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP disruption. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Forgot to put name (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – please protect my talk page against IP vandals till they calm down. requesting long-term semi protection Forgot to put name 05:21, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 08:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: User keeps removing "informational" work for unknown reasons, also wants to redirect to its "School district" page for an invalid reason. Smarty9108 (talk)

Declined, This is a content dispute; discussion is paramount. If that doesn't work, then consider requesting full protection Airplaneman ✈ 08:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to request unprotection for the page 2019 AFC Asian Cup. User:Bearcat protected it indefinitely about a year ago: [16], but I would like to make edits due to recent announcements about the tournament. For details, see Talk:2019 AFC Asian Cup#Edit request on 16 January 2013. I have made a request at the talk page of User:Bearcat but have yet to get a response. Chanheigeorge (talk) 08:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, This is an even that is relatively far off into the future.The proposed article on the talk page does not contain much on the topic. I'd prefer if it were created at a later date when an the topic has enough supporting information for it to exist on its own. Airplaneman ✈ 08:46, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – See page history. This page was almost vandalized for 10 times . Pratyya (Hello!) 09:02, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done by two other admins. Materialscientist (talk) 10:02, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: - edit warrings, disputes, unsourced material. etc.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Airplaneman ✈ 08:25, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent sockpuppetry: One user is persistently removing large content from this article without any explanation and is bypassing semi-protection. Forgot to put name 07:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. — foxj 23:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: persistent vandalism and unsourced changes since the last semi ran out. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 08:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – user req. Forgot to put name 05:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 08:40, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any persistent vandalism. Since the page was created on 5 January only the user himself has edited it. —Psychonaut (talk) 08:45, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP hopping vandalism. nableezy - 05:06, 19 January 2013 (UTC) 05:06, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 48 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 08:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: See Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/John Daker. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 22:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator NawlinWiki.. Airplaneman ✈ 08:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Not vandalism, a well-intentioned IP (possibly multiple editors, several anonymous and SPA accounts have undertaken essentially the same actions) has been removing sourced information critical of doulas from the article for a couple weeks now, and discussion on the talk page has not been helpful. If SP isn't appropriate, any other ideas are greatly appreciated. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 21:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 08:33, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: A disruptive editor using different IPs, probably including proxies, continues adding porn site links to the External links section. Flyer22 (talk) 20:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 08:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: A disruptive editor appearing from at least two IPs has been repeatedly adding blatantly false info and unsourced predictions of impossible future events to this article and the Magic Kingdom Parade article in particular (see below). One of their IPs is currently blocked for two weeks, but now that they're continuing their persistent campaign of disruption from another IP, I think the best thing is to semi-protect both articles. AtticusX (talk) 20:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 08:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: A disruptive editor appearing from at least two IPs has been repeatedly adding blatantly false info and unsourced predictions of impossible future events to this article and the Happiness is Here Parade article in particular (see above). One of their IPs is currently blocked for two weeks, but now that they're continuing their persistent campaign of disruption from another IP, I think the best thing is to semi-protect both articles. AtticusX (talk) 20:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 08:28, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Ongoing edit warring by IP editor against the consensus of other editors. IP has been blocked previously and denied they are responsible for the edits. They refuse to discuss the matter on the article talk page, despite numerous requests. As of today the IP has also started editing from their university. SchroCat (talk) 18:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 08:21, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Continous reverts and edit warring taking place over some disputed content. Protection may help settle things down a bit at this stage. Mar4d (talk) 16:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Mark Arsten. for one week. Airplaneman ✈ 08:18, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced content that is not in agreement with WP:VERIFY. Jetstreamer Talk 13:06, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 08:18, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced content, going against the verifiability policy. Jetstreamer Talk 12:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 08:16, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism for new and unregistered users. Eyesnore 02:01, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 02:09, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Disruptive IP keeps on removing sourced material without valid reasoning.Hellboy42 (talk) 21:53, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. m.o.p 22:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requesting pending changes protection. These IPs regularly remove "unreferenced" etc templates, add same old unsourced content from old copy. Since there are not to many active watchers, these often remain unnoticed. . Tito Dutta (talk) 03:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. — foxj 23:06, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

20 January 2013

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – Adding gossips and unsourced contents by new users and IPs. Torreslfchero (talk) 15:23, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MikeLynch (talk) 16:59, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Only updated by the developer and delivered by a handful.Anon edits are not encouraged. TheStrikeΣagle 10:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:37, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection until November 19, 2013. Vandalism from event in November picked back up upon expiry. The date I suggested here is the original expiry time of the last protection before it was shortened. - Purplewowies (talk) 08:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Gimmetrow for 6 months. -- LuK3 (Talk) 16:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent deletion of sourced info. Egeymi (talk) 09:46, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 10:32, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mirza – The Untold Story (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Gurjinder Romana 09:34, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 10:32, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requesting protection for POV pushing, edit warring, advertising etc. Tito Dutta (talk) 02:38, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Future Perfect at Sunrise. til 21 January. Torreslfchero (talk) 11:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full move-protection: Undiscussed moves going on. Against BRD. Lihaas (talk) 00:38, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent IP vandalism. Snoozlepet (talk) 04:22, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 05:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - Multiple IPs keep adding fictional character Rory Williams to list of Centurions. -- Alpha PrimeTalk||Edits 02:58, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 05:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: KUPL has re-branded to 98.7 The Bull and we don't want anyone that is upset with the change to alter any of the page content. Jenny28GS (talk) 21:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – At present there is no IP edit warring or vandalism on this page. Please see Wikipedia:RADIONAMING#Naming conventions for stations with call signs. It appears per this style convention that 98.7 The Bull should be a redirect to KUPL. In the United States Wikipedia uses call signs to name radio stations. The change in 'branding' is not significant in how we name these articles. If you disagree, please use Talk:KUPL to give your reasoning. EdJohnston (talk) 04:29, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Bambi's back. 'Nuff said, I think. McDoobAU93 05:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Salvidrim! ✉ 05:09, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Ryulong/Header (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite semi-protection: Page in my own userspace; doesn't need to be changed by anyone but myself. —Ryulong (琉竜) 04:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done by yourself in 2009. Materialscientist (talk) 04:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. How did I not remember that.—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:36, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There have been history of vandalism to Biggest Loser since last year. I have found persistent vandalism in The Biggest Loser Pinoy Edition and in The Biggest Loser Asia. Now vandalism by unknown IPs and probably a sockpuppet user vandalized The Biggest Loser: Pinoy Edition (season 1). I would to request full protection for possible edits from unknown IPs for this and the other two articles mentioned. AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 13:51, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Talk page of a blocked sockpuppet, intermittently vandalized by IP socks of some other troll he crossed. (It's like a gang war or something.) No reason that IPs should need to edit. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 00:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A convenient example of said troll's behavior. (Though I don't want anything for my own page.) For the record, I only interacted with Buck briefly and tangentially, and definitely have no problem with the block; just trying to keep the project clean. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 00:38, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done by Bbb23. Materialscientist (talk) 03:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and edit war. Lprd2007 (talk) 23:20, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected – Two months. IPs warring with each other with no intention of waiting for consensus on the talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 04:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edit war. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 23:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected – Two months. EdJohnston (talk) 04:17, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism from IPs. A lot in which consists of removing negative reviews from the article, only keeping positive.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 22:53, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 03:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple IPs and new accounts. Shadowjams (talk) 00:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:47, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection or full protection: High level of IP and registered user vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 21:48, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 22:40, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection or full protection: High level of IP and registered user vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 21:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 22:40, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection or full protection: High level of IP and registered user vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 21:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 22:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection or full protection: High level of IP and registered user vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 21:39, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 22:41, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Please protect the page until deletion discussion is over. E4024 (talk) 12:18, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is odious. The only one who is edit-warring is E4024 [17]. Right after he reverts, he runs here to have the page protected, so as to prevent anyone from reverting him back. Also note he is desperately trying to have the article deleted [18]. The addition of material to an article generally decreases the odds of it being deleted. Thus the request to "protect the page until deletion discussion is over" can be seen as an attempt to prevent users from adding material to the article while the deletion is ongoing, in an attempt to increase the likelihood of it being deleted. To the extent that the article needs protection, it is only from E4024. Athenean (talk) 18:36, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I edited that article for the first time on 10 January 2013 and several times . There already was a Delete Request about the article but I did not join that discussion before 17 January. On the very first day I edited that article I warned people that the creator and basic editor of the article was distorting sources. Only when this distortion, misuse, falsification or whatever to call it did not stop, I joined the discussion on deletion and even there I did not request a deletion at the beginning. These are the facts and I will not fill this page with unnecessary links; anyone who wishes to check my words can do that. I agree there is something "odious" here, but I am not involved as a subject. --E4024 (talk) 18:58, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All you've done is harass other users to no end [19] and edit-war. Of course you're not going to present any diffs to justify your behavior, because you can't. Athenean (talk) 19:06, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 19:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Admin Shabazz; this was only about page protection. It was enough to decline the protection request. Indeed I am neither interested in keeping nor deleting that article. My only concern is to stop a user, who is frequently misusing the sources, from continuing to do that. That is all about it. We have a deletion discussion and no need, for the moment, to go to other boards. Thank you very much all the same. --E4024 (talk) 19:23, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: persistent inclusion of large tracts of unsourced and barely coherent text about tribal identities. Initially by two SPAs but latterly by IP editors.  Velella  Velella Talk   20:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks., after which the page will be automatically unprotected. NW (Talk) 20:49, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – see the talk. This page is repeatedly getting blanked by IPs without consensus and sans thorough discussion. Consider semi-protecting it. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 13:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, there was never any WP:CONSENSUS to move Fictional character to Character (arts). That move is something that was/is mostly supported by User:DionysosProteus. I agree that the IP shouldn't have been redirecting the article like that, but I don't consider that action vandalism. Flyer22 (talk) 17:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – I think most Biggest Loser articles are being vandalized by unknown IP users. This had been happening to The Biggest Loser Philippines. AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 05:38, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:39, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

21 January 2013

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Rolling archive (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Move protection: Number of links to this page is growing, especially in Userspaces. George Ho (talk) 05:23, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 17:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protection: This is part of DYK instructions, in case of resetting prep areas and/or queues. George Ho (talk) 05:21, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. ‑Scottywong| squeal _ 17:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – A pair of users are choosing not to discuss. Would like full protection for 24h to 1w to get them talking. Izno (talk) 01:43, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Users warned to discuss instead of revert. ‑Scottywong| confer _ 17:47, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protection: Highly visible page – This page appears in the admin-protected page T:DYKQ, as well as other pages related to DYK, even if amount of transclusion is very low, like six or seven. George Ho (talk) 19:46, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. No history of vandalism, and this page is never transcluded into article space. ‑Scottywong| express _ 17:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:92.97.168.118 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked. - Happysailor (Talk) 20:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: A better solution would be to remove talk page access for the user. Vacation9 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe so (and that's what's been done), but theres no specific place to request that :) - Happysailor (Talk) 20:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already done. (talk page access removed) by Alexf (talk · contribs) - Happysailor (Talk) 20:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I find this page to be commonly vandalized with opinions. Binko71100 (talk) 18:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| comment _ 18:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism over last 24 hours. --Allthestrongbowintheworld (talk) 18:19, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Indefinite. ‑Scottywong| confer _ 18:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – More edit warring here. Vacation9 18:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. with some pending changes protection for when the full protection expires. ‑Scottywong| spout _ 18:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Virtually all IP edits in the last few months have been reverted as vandalism. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 17:23, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| babble _ 18:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced and dubious content by anons. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| confess _ 18:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection or maybe full: The 3 months protection expired and disruptive edits started again! High level of vandalism and wrong/distruptive info by IP users. Also we have some registered user disruptive edits for example: Israel v Palestine stuff, after the last Google Street View Israel release. - EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 16:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ‑Scottywong| soliloquize _ 18:30, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The protection expired and disruptive edits started again! . Tito Dutta (talk) 14:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive edits by IPs and unconfirmed editors in the article have increased in January because of Asaram Bapu's controversial comments regarding the 2012 Delhi gang rape case. So, I support a longer semi–protection. Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 17:03, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 17:41, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection - the subject of both recent and longer-term religious/racist vandalism. Had to restore a version from May 2012 to find a version without vandalism. Stalwart111 12:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 18:22, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – long term history of vandalism. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| speak _ 18:21, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP vandalism. MicheleZA (talk) 05:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've got time only for a glance; something looks fishy in the history, lot of similar new editors edting. MikeLynch (talk) 06:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| chatter _ 17:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection for 10days+ until end of European transfer window after 31st January 2013. Various anon-vandalism edits re potential but unconfirned transfer to Liverpool F.C.. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 16:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 248 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 16:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent persistent spate of link spamming/reverting by anon editor or editors (5 different IPs since the first of the year). The IP hopping means blocking will be ineffective. Low-traffic page so reverting hasn't been wholly effective (the edit that kicked off the recent trend stayed live for two weeks). —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 11:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. But I have watchlisted too. Lectonar (talk) 12:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List of Star Wars air, aquatic, and ground vehicles (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Same reason for semi-protection of article page: persistent (i.e. over several years) asinine vandalism. --EEMIV (talk) 02:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 13:08, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – long term history of vandalism. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Very little of helpful IP edits in the recent past. Also blocked the most recent vandal as a vandalism only account. MikeLynch (talk) 16:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: There are multiple media reports of the sale of the NBA Sacramento Kings to a Seattle group, intent on relocating the team to Seattle as the new SuperSonics. NBC Sports.com, ESPN.com, and Yahoo Sports. Requesting semi-protect as IPs are already making unsourced changes regarding the status and future of both franchises. Media reports speculate that an official announcement is forthcoming in the next few days, so suggest 7 days. UW Dawgs (talk) 05:27, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. There was just one IP making an unsourced change during the last days. Lectonar (talk) 10:43, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: An anon IP is edit-warring to turn this movie star's article into a fan page about "Zoe." The IP will not discuss his/her edits.Tenebrae (talk) 02:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined If we are talking about the IP 78.... here, I do not see any attempt to talk with her/him, neither on the IP's talk-page, nor on the articles talk-page. And it seems to have stopped now. Lectonar (talk) 10:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – to prevent vandalism from other users. This article has been vandalized times these days and it would be better if this article will be semi-protected for some time. Mediran (t • c) 10:08, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 10:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Too much vandalism for two IP users. Eyesnore 01:50, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One User(s) blocked., the other has stopped after the last warning. Lectonar (talk) 10:22, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection BLP violations with IPs adding flagrant smear campaign information from a self-published website to the talkpage. See talkpage history. Semi-protect both article and article talk.--MONGO 18:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: If at all, this seems to be more about article content, sources etc.. The last edit to the article was a month ago. I would not protect at the moment, but perhaps I am lacking information. Lectonar (talk) 08:54, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 09:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:41, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for a period of 1 week. Unsourced transfer rumour changes in the media. Please protect until official announcements are made. JMHamo (talk) 13:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 08:43, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Lost years of Jesus (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Please unprotect the TALK PAGE of Jesus Lost Years (Talk:Lost years of Jesus)

Talk Page is for exchange of information. Until it is not typical vandalism or vulgarism, in particularly sourced information should not be removed or blocked. It is just vicious wish of user History2007 to do not see or hear arguments which he does not like. Beside I have a question why on his private talk page every note disappeared. The true virtue does not fear about his true activity. Can he make his talk page unreadable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.168.216 (talk) 20:44, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not unprotected The talk-page has been protected for a good reason, and protection was (and is) necessary, obviously. Lectonar (talk) 08:40, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 03:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:45, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protect for at most a day. Edit war over wording of core policy. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Black Kite.. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 10:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - New episodes for the show have recently been announced, attracting a lot of unwanted attention to the page from unregistered editors. LoveWaffle (talk) 22:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also ask this be done quickly, as trying to protect the page myself has brought me close to 3RR if I'm not there already. - LoveWaffle (talk) 08:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This looks more like an edit war to me about which source is more reliable. I've full protected it for now, leaving this up to another admin to tone it down if they view it as vandalism. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 09:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected (procedural) by DQ, above. Lectonar (talk) 10:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. The Banner talk 18:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 09:17, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection or Pending changes intensive POV pushing and edit-warring from various IPs and sockpupet. Edit history is a trash. --ELEKHHT 06:49, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MikeLynch (talk) 06:59, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Subject is high profile enough that indefinite protection is warranted. SGMD1 Talk/Contribs 17:30, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:50, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection This page is a constant target for sales inflation. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 15:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – UFC event occuring with multiple IP editors changing the article with editors in good standing having to undo damaging changes. Suggest protection for no less than 48 hours to give the results and media services time to write pieces so we can source it. Hasteur (talk) 04:54, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 36 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: There's a slow motion edit war regarding whether to link to the new fork, or the existing wikia site. A discussion has started on the talk page, and a WP:3O requested, however IPs still continue to change the links. Legoktm (talk) 05:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 06:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Baseball Watcher 02:23, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Zzyzx11. --Webclient101talk 03:32, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs have been vandalizing the page for about a week or so. Protection until the NFL season ends is a possibility. ZappaOMati 20:32, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Zzyzx11. --Webclient101talk 03:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit warring over a map. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 21:49, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days. Tiptoety talk 22:35, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The name "Macedonia persistently being deleted or changed to "FYROM". Macedonia is by far the most well known name for the country. Rocketrod1960 (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days. Tiptoety talk 22:30, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Increasing periods of protection without cease to vandalism. Have been constructive IP edits though. Vacation9 14:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by Acroterion (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Tiptoety talk 22:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent blanking of sourced content by IP-hopping editor. No reply on article talk or user talk, will try to get another noticeboard interested (maybe NPOVN) but unless semiprotected, the most likely outcome of that is more editors for the IP to revert... bobrayner (talk) 13:33, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IP has now broken 3RR after warning. Filed WP:AN3 case here. Kahastok talk 18:10, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected - Two months per this closure at WP:AN3. EdJohnston (talk) 18:37, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requesting 1 week semi protection!. Tito Dutta (talk) 09:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for one week. Please re-report if the problem resumes and we'll re-protect for a longer period. -- Dianna (talk) 22:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – request change from PC to semi given the high edit rate and the amount of vandalism and BLP vios which are left to sit in the page history. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:03, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely; every time the semi-protection is lifted the problems resume within days. -- Dianna (talk) 21:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Snoozlepet (talk) 03:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for one month. -- Dianna (talk) 21:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

22 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Multiple IP vandalism. If possible, three day semi-protection. Msw1002 (talk) 17:12, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 17:33, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Did you know (edit | project page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Various IP's blanking the page. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined for now; it was the same ip-range, and I think it was school break time. Lectonar (talk) 14:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection - subject of intense vandalism from a number of IPs over the last few days. Album is due to be released in the next couple of weeks. Request semi-protection until it is releases and there are more eyes on it to prevent vandalism. ClueBOT has been working hard but missed a few instances. Stalwart111 05:13, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. If problems persist, please relist. Lectonar (talk) 13:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. As soon as temporary semi-protection ended, anon vandal was back, adding unreferenced material glorifying his/her Sufi lineage. Please semi-protect. If this forces vandal to edit under a contactable username, we can contact him/her and request that he/she start a new article about his/her order and add referenced material, rather than trying to hijack the main article for sectarian purposes. Zora (talk) 22:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 12:10, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection constant vandalism

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 13:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: There are multiple media reports of the sale of the NBA Sacramento Kings to a Seattle group, intent on relocating the team to Seattle as the new SuperSonics. NBC Sports.com, ESPN.com, and Yahoo Sports. Requesting semi-protect as IPs are already making unsourced changes regarding the status and future of both franchises. Media reports speculate that an official announcement is forthcoming in the next few days, so suggest 7 days.

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It's still not at a level to require protection. GedUK  12:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: This is about a very important historical event! It shouldn't be vulnerable to vandals!. SmartyPantsKid, Signing off. 15:12, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 15:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Persistent sales inflation. According to the RIAA, it is certified 2x Platinum not three. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I have watchlisted. Lectonar (talk) 11:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Multiple removal of AfD tags by different IPs who seem connected with the company who are in the process of launching this product. . ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 18:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I think the company has got the message. Let the AfD run its course now. Lectonar (talk) 11:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs have been continuously adding deliberate factual errors and vandalism for quite some time now. — MST☆R (Chat Me!) 13:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for 1 week. Many unhelpful IP edits about Haidara's proposed move to England but nothing official. JMHamo (talk) 11:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of five days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Not quite a week but should do the trick. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 14:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – long term history of vandalism. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 14:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Span (talk) 07:56, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 14:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PC Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Lectonar (talk) 14:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Firedemon727 (talk) 06:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 08:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I would like again to request to for page protection for this page. Vandalism has been rampant this days from unknown IPs. The unknown IPs had previously vandalized the Asian version page, the Brunei page, the first season of the Philippine version... and now in this article. All IPs that did vandalized all those articles point to one location source only. The IPs are all from Israel, and vandalizing the article with Hebrew characters. I would like to request a protection for this page... and if ever for those other mentioned pages for atleast a month. AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 05:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 12:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 21:32, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Could all the people obsessed with their favourite soccer star not just be obsessed Wikipedia editors, playing by the rules? Lectonar (talk) 13:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: The article was PC level 1 protected until the trial ended, can we try out PC protection again? The original protecting admin hasn't edited in around 2 weeks so I've made the request here. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:23, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Lectonar (talk) 11:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP insertion of Original Research. See one latest example: [20]. Explanation [21] [22]. See the history of page in question for ongoing IP abuse. Cavann (talk) 23:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article was protected back in December for about a month due to IPs connected with the company removing the COI template and adding unsourced/spammy content. During its protection, I rewrote and sourced the article as most of it was copied from the site's webpage and was nothing but a fluff piece. A few days after protection was removed, IPs began editing again with the same MO - removing the COI template and adding unsourced content. I request that this page be reprotected for a longer duration as I don't have the wherewithal to put up with this behavior for months at a time again. It's like someone from the company is assigned to keep watch of this article and revert all changes to it. . Pinkadelica♣ 19:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 11:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – attack page on non-notable student. Altered Walter (talk) 10:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Lectonar (talk) 10:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – attack page on non-notable student. Altered Walter (talk) 10:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Lectonar (talk) 10:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – long term history of vandalism especially because this is a very attractive target. No point with PC given that there have been no recent constructive IP contribs to the page. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 11:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism resuming almost immediately after the end of a six-month protection; indefinite protection recommended due to an ongoing high risk of vandalism. DPH1110 (talk) 05:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. Lectonar (talk) 09:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary protection: An edit war has erupted over a content dispute. Freshh (talk) 03:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. (for Kude90 who was at 6 or 7RR), also issued a warning for an IP who was over 3RR by a smidge. --j⚛e deckertalk 04:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent promotionalism with poor sourcing by multiple accounts. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 02:17, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. Lectonar (talk) 09:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection. Vandalism started the moment the last protection was lifted, as ever. She seems to be a continuous, permanent target. Span (talk) 05:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected - Re-SPP'ed for a year. See you in 2014! Salvidrim! ✉ 08:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editor persistently removing references,. Darkness Shines (talk) 01:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The user is being over dramatic because I've removed unreliable sources. There is no vandalism to this page. He won't even open up a dialogue with me to talk about the sources. He's even opened up an W:RS on me. I'm deeply puzzled by this users actions. 2.96.201.168 (talk) 02:05, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined There is no need for protection. Bbb23 is keeping an eye on both edit-warriors here, and the next one will be blocked. (While there may not be vandalism, there's plenty edit-warring to go around.) Drmies (talk) 03:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Requesting temporary semi-protection for a short period. Welker's wife made some less-than-polite comments that are being posted here plus some post-victory gloating/insults. Ravensfire (talk) 23:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 23:47, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. There is a anonymous IP user who constantly changes his IP and makes disruptive edits to push his own POV in the article, deleting other sources, he also makes personal attacks against my user. There are also lots of edits done by different IP in general who seem not be informed of the subject and not use the talk page but only insist on editing without sources. Page should be protected so that only users with background knowledge about the article should be able to edit. And so future edit wars can be avoided, which seem to happen all the time in the article.DragonTiger23 (talk) 15:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reportedly I have been using IP socks in this article. (So I support the semi-protection request. :-) Mehmed II would be at better hands without IP access to contribute to it. --E4024 (talk) 16:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ‑Scottywong| chatter _ 18:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: danger of edit-warring with a new editor who refuses to use the Talk page to properly express his/her arguments. Borsoka (talk) 14:23, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. User has started contribution to talk page discussion. ‑Scottywong| spout _ 18:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Deletion sourced material and requesting court verdict!! Instead, putting unsourced material to praise the person. Egeymi (talk) 08:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. ‑Scottywong| converse _ 18:01, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

23 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Toccata quarta (talk) 21:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of ten days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 21:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Edit War caused by clues from the Pioneer Press Treasure Hunt Jakiah (talk) 12:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. by Materialscientist --j⚛e deckertalk 17:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection Celebrity death hoax. Protect until truth of the matter comes out or furor of editing the page dies down--Vercalos (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism of a BLP. - MrX 19:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 19:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism. Semiprotection, or pending changes would be beneficial. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:36, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 17:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: an IP editor want to change a long standing version of this article. Discussion has been started on the talk page but he/she has been unable to provide a reference to support the change. Jim Sweeney (talk) 14:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined The article is under pending changes protection. Lectonar (talk) 15:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated disruption to BLP article from vandal with shifting IP beginning immediately after block of vandal account. Rivertorch (talk) 16:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 17:14, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I am patrolling Biggest Loser national versions and their seasons, and this version has history of persistent vandalism by unknown IPs. Would like to request at least two months of page protection (same as what you guys did on The Biggest Loser Pinoy Edition article. AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 16:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It's very confusing, because an IP took a load of that out and got reverted as vandalism, and now yuo're saying that the content is vandalism. If yuo could relist or raise on my talk page and explain it further, that might help. GedUK  12:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - despite lengthy discussion re age on talk page being concluded, IPs are still reverting year of birth to 1985 without adding or even changing 1981 sources. Stellaseeker (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Several users popping up, and making changes against WP:NPOV. Possible sockpuppetry issues as well. Mdann52 (talk) 11:05, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It's been 2 days since any edits to that page, so hopefully it's settled for now. Relist if necessary. GedUK  12:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Article is now getting spillover of the persistent vandalism and BLP violations that've been happening at Theresa Spence and Hunger strike. --Ronz (talk) 04:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:39, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistant vandalism - IP 74.57.201.44 has been editing several character bios to a generic, fictitious account. Before Sakai and after [23]

Declined It's impossible to tell what should be there and what shouldn't, I'm hugely reluctant to protect a page that's edited so uch by IPs seemingly with little problem, and if it's one IP, then report them to WP:AIV. GedUK  12:25, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – It appears there has been a drawn out edit war here going on for a while. I'd suggest temporary full-protection and semi-protection when the full-protection expires. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 21:15, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined by dint of the fact this request has sat around so long, I think I can say the level doesn't seem to be too bad the moment. Relist if necessary. GedUK  12:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – repeated BLP violations by IPs. Gaijin42 (talk) 13:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 14:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Jim1138 (talk) 09:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 14:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Paybillycom is continually vandalising article. Rocketrod1960 (talk) 06:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Additionally, User:Paybillcom has been blocked as a vandalism-only account. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Genre warring and uncompromised changes.

BlastBeat4 (talk) 03:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 14:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Repeated addition of unsourced information. Things like awards should always be properly referenced. . Biker Biker (talk) 23:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 14:09, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Classical edit warring without any discussion on the Talk Page. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 20:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full Protection: Wanted to secure the page from being misconducted and misused. 01:06 pm, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Declined If I fully protect your userpage, you will not be able to edit it yourself; and there was no vandalism there up until now. And we ususally do not protect user talk-pages. Please read our protection policy for user-pages. Lectonar (talk) 08:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, after looking at it, it is not really an appropriate Userpage, that why it is up for deletion now. Please read also WP:Userpage. Lectonar (talk) 08:56, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – gross BLP, just nip it in the bud please.   little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  19:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:06, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Serial sockpuppeteer User:Mangoeater1000 now editing as an unregistered user here. 72Dino (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Barek. GedUK  13:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. IP Edits continuously Changing Name from "Asa Butterfield" to "Asa boop" and "Asa bopp" Andrew Wiggin (talk) 10:18, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • (Non-administrator comment) On the one hand, the vandalism isn't incredibly frequent - occuring anywhere between once a day and once a week, and getting removed by the next edit. On the other hand, vandalism and its reversion do comprise the majority of this article's recent edits, and some of the reverts have been significantly slower than we generally aim for. So I, for one, would say to go for Pending Changes, at least at first, especially since the mere presence of the white lock often deters over 50% of the vandals. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 10:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, so Pending-changes protected Lectonar (talk) 12:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism or unsourced BLP additions. I just issued three warnings for edits made in the last five hours that have not been reverted until now, and the only constructive IP edits this month have been to revert unconstructive edits made by other IPs. Intelligentsium 00:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:36, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List of Star Wars air, aquatic, and ground vehicles (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – NB entry at [24]: responding admin. blocked IP vandal, but vandal has now hopped to another IP. (Original RPP: "Persistent vandalism – Same reason for semi-protection of article page: persistent [i.e. over several years] asinine vandalism"). --EEMIV (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:29, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Elongate page protection please, right after the last protection expiry they have started adding the same content! . Tito Dutta (talk) 10:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Pending-changes protected indefinitely. KTC (talk) 12:07, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Tito Dutta (talk) 12:16, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Did you know (edit | project page | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from an IP-hopping vandal who deletes threads and leaves a summary of "SUBJ1". A week's semi-protection should be sufficient. Prioryman (talk) 19:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP socks of MalesAlwaysBest (talk · contribs). Darkness Shines (talk) 22:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Salvio giuliano. GedUK  12:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Magnet for vandalism, unsourced trivia and BLP violations from fans. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 01:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: As has happened with previous seasons (List of songs in Glee (season 3) and List of songs in Glee (season 2)), IPs are continually adding unsourced and inaccurate (contrary to available sources) information about artists and performers. It would be nice to have a block again this season until it's over in late May. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 18 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection Just click the history please [25] IP addresses keep making idiotic vandalism which is reverted regularly. Dream Focus 21:05, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Lectonar (talk) 08:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated – This article has been deleted three times in as many months. Sir Sputnik (talk) 04:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:29, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: You can look at the history of edits, clear vandalism. 68.101.243.26 (talk) 02:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Low volume of edits, moderate percentage of vandalism, much of the vandalism would be clear-cut. Seems like a plausible use case for PC1. --j⚛e deckertalk 04:38, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't looked much but I've enacted PC1 for 1 year as per Joe Decker's wishes above. Salvidrim! ✉ 06:39, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. FrankDev (talk) 01:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Optimist on the run. Materialscientist (talk) 04:32, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

24 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:03, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Persistent vandalism – People can't seem to be mature about a lesbian mayor. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. for one month by Nawlinwiki. (semi) Mark Arsten (talk) 20:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term pattern of IP vandalism. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 00:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: An IP editor seems to be repeatedly adding plot detail that is extraneous and uses unencyclopedic language. The editor seems to be on a dynamic IP (see [26] and [27]), and the earlier one has already been blocked for disruptive editing once (see User talk:69.231.39.82). Editors have better things to do than constantly reverting this guy, so a few days semi protection would be appreciated. Betty Logan (talk) 23:40, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another Bambifan sock. tutterMouse (talk) 06:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected Restored indefinite semi-protection (which was just removed a couple weeks ago). Mark Arsten (talk) 20:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent spate of IP and new user vandalism. - MrX 18:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 4 years, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 19:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Regular IP vandalism. Page was unprotected one week ago, and vandalism began immediately. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 18:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editor warring over nationality. Binksternet (talk) 18:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| converse _ 18:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – It seems that there have been a number prominent changes to the club's line-up, which are immediately reverted. 4Chan out for lolz or something else? Temporary protection from anon & new edits of 33 hours (or thereabouts) please. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 60 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 18:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Subject of a reported trade. Key quote: "The deal reportedly was agreed upon, pending physicals. Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com first reported the agreement. Neither the Braves nor the D-backs have commented or confirmed the reports." [28]. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 18:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Disruptive edit warring and BLP violations by IP that refuses to engage in substantive discussion. His last edit summary reads as follows: "Pan-Zionist POV pushing, restoring sources". Plot Spoiler (talk) 03:48, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

False informations. You're removing sources (her personal webpage), you did not engage in discussion. --109.165.155.142 (talk) 03:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please just look at this user's edits and edit summaries ("Pan-Zionist POV pushing"?). This user's familiarity with the Wikipedia system also makes it likely s/he is a sock. Plot Spoiler (talk) 04:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the sockpuppet bit. I left the IP a warning not to vandalize or disrupt pages and they left a "Message-back" banner on my page. It is VERY unlikely a IP user would know how to do that! Andrew Wiggin (talk) 04:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| confer _ 18:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full Protection Persistent reversion from numerous new, almost identical accounts focused primarily on this page. Justiciero1811 (talk) 22:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Users blocked as well. ‑Scottywong| verbalize _ 18:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article receives near constant vandalism edits from mostly anon IPs, generally 3-5 a day. -- ferret (talk) 17:40, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. It was already indefinitely semi'd until being full protected during a content dispute. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 18:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: A persistent IP-hopping vandal has been targeting these two articles.The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 17:40, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both Semi-protected for a period of three weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 18:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: A user has been making major changes to the article by removing well sourced info(evidently wp:idontlikeit) and has mentioned in the article's talk page that an "edit war is the only way to get me to agree to dispute mediation". See here:[29]. Although i never violated any of wiki's editorial policies, the user has been making false accusations about me, and is calling me out for an edit war, so that he can resort to dispute mediation. The user has also been very abusive in talk page discussions, here - [30], [31]. The page has been protected a lot of times in the past due to similar issues and there seems to be no end to it. Despite the fact that other experienced users/admins have allowed the original revision to exist, that user has been making some major changes, and as you can evidently see from the diffs provided, he's calling me out for an edit war so that he can have his ways of getting things done, and is being very abusive in talk page discussions. Please protect the page until consensus is reached. This has been going on for too long. Hari7478 (talk) 20:05, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| chat _ 18:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Anonymous IPs keep vandalizing the page. Paris1127 (talk) 18:05, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| spill the beans _ 18:06, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Socks of MalesAlwaysBest. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:01, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| spill the beans _ 18:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Like Aryabhata article this article too has a long time disruptive editing history. But, unlike Aryabhata article in this article there are few sections where expansion/work is required. I am requesting a pending changes protection here! . Tito Dutta (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected. Favonian (talk) 17:24, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:24.144.38.159 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary full protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. Talkpage access removed. Acroterion (talk) 13:42, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. 155.70.59.195 (talk) 03:24, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 13:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. NickAang (talk) 07:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

nominating an non-notable article for deletion is far from persistent vandalism. Ridernyc (talk) 07:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 08:40, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – as well as more ordinary vandalism. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:57, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP warring over nationality . Binksternet (talk) 13:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 08:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated vandalism and sock puppetry. . Biker Biker (talk) 10:50, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done by De728631. Materialscientist (talk) 11:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and Poor edits (Rumors, Unsourced Comments, and blatant misleading info posts) I Believe ether a few month Semi-protect till people lose interest in Windows 8 or a Indefinite pending changes would be helpful. Andrew Wiggin (talk) 08:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – New users and IPs continue to vandalise this BLP article, and add unsourced content. — MST☆R (Chat Me!) 03:47, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:47, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Slow-moving edit war because of WP:ARBPIA 1RR restriction. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 10:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ‑Scottywong| speak _ 06:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Mathonius (talk) 18:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One of the editors involved has been blocked for 3 hours, so page protection might not be necessary. Mathonius (talk) 18:58, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree; Declined per above. The block might prove not to be of sufficient length, though. Lectonar (talk) 19:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – I've had this article on my watchlist since I reverted some vandalism two months ago. Since then, I've noticed that every edit to pop up on my watchlist has been vandalism or reversion. So I looked back in the history to find the last actual constructive edit (excluding "see also" additions and the like): I made it to a year ago before I gave up. The only question is whether semi-protection would be more apt; I'm fond of the idea of indef PC, combined with shorter-term semis as necessary, and since the article's currently receiving only a few edits a week, I see this as a perfect candidate for such a solution. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 18:38, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected ‑Scottywong| squeal _ 06:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Too many Ajith fans/haters ruin the article and are dominantly IP users, so protection for the article is needed forever. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 06:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

25 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Austria is a country and the article Austria represents Austria in Wikipedia. So this page should be vandal free. See the page history for information. Pratyya (Hello!) 14:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Yes, well, ideally all of Wikipedia should be vandal free, but on the other hand Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that "everyone can edit"..and not every anonymous edit is vandalism. Lectonar (talk) 14:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Several IP editors (probably the same person using different computers) keep on changing the release dates of this single and the next single in the Info box. They have all been warned but it keeps happening. .  — AARON • TALK 13:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ok, we had the IP yesterday which stopped editing after the final warning, and 3 instances of IP edits today. This is under the threshold for semiprotection. If problems persist, please relist, although using warnings and WP:AIV is strongly advised. Lectonar (talk) 13:30, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 12:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined As it has been reuserfied now, I see no great danger that it will be recreated. Lectonar (talk) 12:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have to disagree with this assessment. It's been inappropriately moved back to the article namespace three times since being userified per afd last April. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:49, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – The page was the subject of intense edit warring by an editor with COI issues. They were blocked and now their sock/meatpuppets are continuing the disruption. Psychonaut (talk) 15:10, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected by Wehwalt (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for 3 days. tutterMouse (talk) 17:10, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Treaty of Grosswardein constantly being copy-paste moved onto this page. Mdann52 (talk) 13:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Favonian (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for 5 days. tutterMouse (talk) 17:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – Lots of copy-paste moves on this one... Mdann52 (talk) 13:25, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Favonian (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for 5 days. tutterMouse (talk) 17:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: The subject of this article has expressed resentment from vandalism and BLP policy violations on this article (1, 2). I think that pending changes would be a good temporary remedy to prevent such vandalism from going live. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Article has been deleted and it's only been created once (non-admin). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(procedural); the bot will not archive "not done"s Lectonar (talk) 12:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

unprotected: This page is being vandalised and wrongly semi-protected by user Qwyrxian. This article needs edits to its content. An user named Qwyrxian is thwarting the development of the Wikipedia page Prince Jinan. 5.199.171.88 (talk) 12:51, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not unprotected See the article's talkpage. Lectonar (talk) 12:53, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High level of IP vandalism by various IP addresses. Even if their edits are reverted repeatedly, they keep adding nonsensical information. This IP address is one of the many - 117.194.46.219. An article of such importance should be protected for at least eight to nine months. Animefreak234 (talk) 09:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. And not all IP edit are vandalism. Lectonar (talk) 10:02, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection; A user has been removing "proven work" and would insist to remove it, even when it is sourced, I believe that he/she thinks that the proven work is "fan-made" and or does not bother to look at the reliable links. The single "Freedom" by Nicki Minaj, has been sold as a promotional CD single, the single cover is even featured on Advertisements. --Smarty9108 (talk) 10:35, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Please use the articles talkpage to engage discussion. Lectonar (talk) 10:28, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: For some reason the article has recently been repeatedly vandalized by several IPs (or one individual using several IPs). One of them replaced content with "trolled by the master" four times until being blocked; another IP promptly appeared. --MelanieN (talk) 04:08, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 10:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – long term history of vandalism, and it's a somewhat attractive target. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. We had about 15 instances of IP vandalism in 2012, and not really that much this year. I'll keep it on my watchlist, though. Lectonar (talk) 09:05, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for one month. Many BLP issues do to alleged rape reported in the media. JMHamo (talk) 12:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism from unregistered users. Zia Khan 22:24, 24 January 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 08:40, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request on talk page there. Jnorton7558 (talk) 01:03, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 08:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I am patrolling The Biggest Loser national versions and their seasons, and this article has the history of persistent vandalism by unknown IPs. Would like to request at least two months of page protection (same as what you guys did on The Biggest Loser Pinoy Edition article). These IPs (109.253.7.176, 95.35.63.143, 95.35.63.216, 46.210.224.176, and 176.13.201.10) who had vandalize the article the whole month are all located in Israel. I would also like to have them blocked for I believe all this edits are all done by one man only. AR E N Z O Y 1 6A•t a l k• 15:53, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined for now. This is rather strange...not every IP edit seems to be vandalism, and all this taking out and putting in seems rather obsessive. Would you care to make a more precise explanation on my talk-page? Then I will look into it. Lectonar (talk) 08:57, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 12:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request page protection till August, multiple IPs and new users are constantly adding additional data which hasn't happened yet. Clear case of WP:Crystal. This footballer doesn't join Tottenham Hotspur F.C. till the summer, but lots of editors keep editing the article making it look like he is already at the club. . Govvy (talk) 11:34, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Perhaps they will lose interest...and reprotection is always possible. Lectonar (talk) 11:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Ip socking, when Ip autoblock came off IP returned followed shortly by a brand new account who immediately ran back to this page and added copyrighted images. SPI has been filed again requesting checkuser to confirm but it's pretty duckish . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:11, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 11:53, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: request change from indef semi-protection to indef pending changes. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Lectonar (talk) 10:34, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is a freshly released Bollywood film and disruption,good faith edits are ongoing.It have a high chance of disturbance in incomings days too.Really needs tem protection for at least two weeks. ---zeeyanketu talk to me 08:53, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:31, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Unsourced changes to album sales. Article was semi-protected before for the same reason. — Oz 05:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:31, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Richard A. Falk (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Probably Long-term abuse. Webclient101talk 04:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Talk pages are rarely protected, except for the "most severe cases of vandalism", per policy. ‑Scottywong| squeal _ 06:38, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. STATic message me! 21:46, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: This article has a long history of being the target of spammers. Long-term semi-protection is requested. Deli nk (talk) 19:05, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected by Beeblebrox Lectonar (talk) 09:20, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Various IPs vandalise the article literally hours after someone reverts it back to the original sourced version. It is getting out of control. In the past three weeks, the article has been vandalised at least 7 times, and would have been vandalised more had registered users taken care of it immediately. Please consider protecting it for more than 7 days, as that probably would not stop a vandal who has been messing with the article constantly since April 2012. Parishan (talk) 18:35, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Lectonar (talk) 10:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Unconfirmed free agent signing. The team is not confirming the deal, and it will require a physical examination before becoming official, which is not a cake walk for a player with an injury history like Marcum's [32]. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:25, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Disruptive edit warring by IP that refuses to engage in substantive discussion . Plot Spoiler (talk) 03:47, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious that you're avoiding discussion on Talk page and you're trying to spread propaganda (nominating highly NPOV-violated article to "Did you know...?") --109.165.155.142 (talk) 03:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please just look at this user's edits, edit summaries and talk page comments ("It's clearly that you promote Zionist propaganda"). This user's familiarity with the Wikipedia system also makes it likely s/he is a sock. Plot Spoiler (talk) 04:03, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the sockpuppet bit. I left the IP a warning not to vandalize or disrupt pages and they left a "Message-back" banner on my page. It is VERY unlikely a IP user would know how to do that! Andrew Wiggin (talk) 04:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Lectonar (talk) 10:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 03:08, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 48 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 03:11, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: since the beginning of January, it has been one act of vandalism after another. Some of it gets reverted, but a lot of incorrect information sticks in the article. (On a side note, more generally speaking, I don't understand how it's possible that changes from IP addresses don't get verified. It surprises me how long it takes for vandalism to be undone. The history of the article in question is packed with examples. But I also made this change to undo a section clearing that took place six days prior to it. What if I hadn't noticed the section clearing. Surely six days is way outside the time frame during which volunteers check controversial changes; it had a section blanking tag.) --82.170.113.123 (talk) 03:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 03:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated IP vandalism of the gameplay section. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ‑Scottywong| chat _ 06:36, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: from continuous vandalism over many months. Span (talk) 02:44, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nearly all recent edits have been vandalism. Airplaneman ✈ 03:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP/recent account vandalism. Novangelis (talk) 02:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Acroterion.. 1 week of semi-protection. Airplaneman ✈ 03:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 02:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 96 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 03:09, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection:An anon obsessively keeps redlinking Tranji Studios, an article that will never be created because they developed only 1 game (this one) before going bankrupt. No one but me really ever edits the article anyway. --Niemti (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:36, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You kidding? More than a dozen, continuing for nearly a year, is "not enough"? --Niemti (talk) 21:26, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not. It's a dozen over a year, that's pretty minimal even if it's persistent compared to other cases with that amount over two or three days. tutterMouse (talk) 22:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – There's an ongoing edit war regarding the inclusion or not of a map. I'm not involved in this war at all, yet I think full-protecting the article will force the parts to discuss at the article's talk page and reach consensus. Jetstreamer Talk 19:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I don't think full protection is warranted at this point, but feel free to re-report if edit warring continues. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:07, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request unprotection, Player made his pro football debut and want to create the article per WP:FOOTY. Here is profile to show he played transfermarkt
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 20:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected - Nabla (talk) 00:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There has been a wide variety of vandalism by IPs and new users, especially since every edit since January 22 has been vandalism and reverting. ZappaOMati 22:35, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: BLP policy violations. Widr (talk) 22:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I think there is too much vandalism right now for PC to be worthwhile. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:03, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism over long term. 99.136.252.89 (talk) 19:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:43, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Some major changes were made by another user where factual data have been altered according to his own agenda. I've reverted them back to the original revision. Need protection until reaching a consensus. Hari7478 (talk) 20:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Please do not edit war over it. ‑Scottywong| confabulate _ 18:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

26 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The page has been blanked by users using several different IP addresses today. I suggest that you semi-protect this for a while to prevent users who are not logged in from editing the page. Stefan2 (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Acroterion (talk) 17:26, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The page has been blanked by users using several different IP addresses today. I suggest that you semi-protect this for a while to prevent users who are not logged in from editing the page. Stefan2 (talk) 17:19, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Acroterion (talk) 17:27, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 01:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what the best course of action here is. There are quite a few vandalism edits being made by IPs, but there are also quite a few edits that, if they aren't correct (I really don't know much about the movie) at least not obviously unconstructive. Perhaps another admin could take a look and comment as well. J.delanoygabsadds 02:23, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated – I requested that this page be salted earlier today. The request was declined on the basis that userification meant it was unlikely that the article would be recreated. In most cases this is true, but this article has been recreated three times, in spite of being userified. I made this comment in response to the decline, but the thread was archived before anyone responded. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected -- Dianna (talk) 17:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Torreslfchero (talk) 11:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism by IP hopping vandal Jim1138 (talk) 10:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection: Content dispute, no discussions. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. J.delanoygabsadds 02:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of unsourced and incoherent gibberish (or assuming good faith is by a poorly-skilled non-English native speaker). . Biker Biker (talk) 20:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. J.delanoygabsadds 02:04, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection Persistent sales inflation. [33] Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I don't think there is frequent enough vandalism to justify protecting the page at this time. If it gets worse, please feel free to re-report. J.delanoygabsadds 01:57, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP vandalism.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:38, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. J.delanoygabsadds 01:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Recently increased vandalism[34] mainly by different IPs. --Túrelio (talk) 23:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. J.delanoygabsadds 01:55, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Courcelles 21:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP blanking. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 17:12, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) The primary IP has been blocked, but since another similar IP was blanking yesterday, I think a temporary semi would make sure it doesn't happen again in the short term. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 17:34, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 21:03, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP vandalism.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. No other vandalism besides two IP blankings today. --Bongwarrior (talk) 21:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

27 January 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for one week.. Unsourced transfer speculation leading to vandalism. JMHamo (talk) 21:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:33, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - IPs have deleted sourced material twice in the last two months. This is not new: the page has been vandalized many times since it was created. Actually, the article was once blanked. See the talk page for more information. Nataev (talk) 21:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:27, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IPs edit warring against consensus. Remember that any IP/editor working in MMA topics are under general sanctions. LlamaAl (talk) 23:35, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This was fully protected on the 13th of this month by Joe Decker (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for similar reasons. Airplaneman ✈ 01:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – See the history. Maybe vandalized for 3 times. Pratyya (Hello!) 15:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only two unique vandals recently. Not much else in the past month. Airplaneman ✈ 17:31, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by more than one anonymous IP. Infex (talk) 20:59, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 96 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:24, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There seem to be a series of IP's who insist on edit warring over the Genres for all Between The Burried and Me articles. Ridernyc (talk) 20:46, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:24, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There seem to be a series of IP's who insist on edit warring over the Genres for all Between The Burried and Me articles. Ridernyc (talk) 20:45, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:23, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: There seem to be a series of IP's who insist on edit warring over the Genres for all Between The Burred and Me articles. Ridernyc (talk) 20:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:22, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Obviously, this page needs to be semi protected. Last one finished on 16 January, and nationalistic struggle already started again. I propose semi for at least several months. WhiteWriterspeaks 20:25, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: WP:SPA with everchanging IP keeps reverting against WP:NOT consensus established on the talk page. Has already been semi-protected for a month, yet he started in over on the same day protection ended. Dmitry (talk•contibs) 19:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: WP:SPA with everchanging IP keeps reverting against WP:NOT consensus established on the talk page. Has already been semi-protected for a month, yet he started it over again. Dmitry (talk•contibs) 19:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi protection: High level of IP and new user vandalism. Recurring removal of references and valid items; adding red links and disambiguation links, rumours about living people etc. I am currently working on revamping this article and requested pending changes protection but it does not help the article, as the IP vandalism is very frequent. It makes my job pretty difficult to try to finish up the references and cleanup of text when I have to spend my time restoring deleted content and cleaning up after IPs when simple rollback doesn't work. This is a frequently visited list of living people with around 4000 views a day and gets a lot of vandalism. 小龙 (Timish) # xiǎolóng de xìnxiāng 19:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:36, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. The Banner talk 19:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:37, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and excessive content put in by unregistered users. Page was protected until 18th of this month, because of similar issues. When protection was taken down, it started all over again. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:51, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP addresses have been added unsourced statements. IP addresses have also been adding a player named Diego Antonio Reyes on the loan section but the player is not on loan. GoPurple'nGold24 17:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Continous highly-POV, completely ahistorical and uncyclopedic edits by the various IP addresses used by Unique2tell (which is all he/she does). Niemti (talk) 16:33, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:36, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: So a redirect can be created to The Lumineers. David1217 What I've done 17:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Airplaneman ✈ 17:38, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! David1217 What I've done 17:42, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem :) Airplaneman ✈ 18:01, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP hopper persistently adding an advert to his company. . Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 16:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 17:14, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Same IP as above on Feng shui. When stopped at adding an advert to a competitor, resorted to blanking most of the article. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 16:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 17:13, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: A number of IPs using a very funny youtube video [35] to make a considerably less funny and vandalising edit (eg. [36]). U-Mos (talk) 16:16, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of seven days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by an IP user who, despite discussions on the Talk page, insists on re-adding inappropriate links and photographs with political motivations. I have reverted his/her edits repeatedly but semi-protection for a long period of time would help. --TBM10 (talk) 14:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: I guess that a semi-protection of a week will be enough to convince the IP that Donaghcloney is really in Co. Down, conform the sources provided, and not partly in Co. Armagh, as the IP thinks. This content dispute is now turning into an edit war. The Banner talk 13:20, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: I guess that a semi-protection of a week will be enough to convince the IP that Donaghcloney is really in Co. Down, conform the sources provided, and not partly in Co. Armagh, as the IP thinks. This content dispute is now turning into an edit war. The Banner talk 13:20, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:25, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. change in grosing figures and verdicts with no sources. Anidemun (talk) 12:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandalism and insertion of unsourced content, this tomfoolery has gone on for over 5 years without significant action, that is a MAJOR oversight. James (T • C) • 9:47pm • 10:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. This redirect was created in 2006, has a history of 30 or nearly 30 edits, at an average of 5 per year or so...and pretty much every single one except the page's creation has been vandalism or reverting it. I know it is relatively infrequent, but with this much vandalism on a redirect, and the fact that there is no reason for this page to be edited by anyone other than an established user as it already redirects to Fuck, and about half of the edits redirecting to people (BLP issues), I am requesting semi-protection of this page.
BTW can we at least make an edit filter that prevents people changing bad word and/or homosexual slurs to BLP redirects, as redirecting bad words to former presidents, celebrities, and conservative pundits appears to be one of the most common forms of vandalism. That is only if the page can't be semi-protected for some policy reason.--Free Wales Now! what did I screw up?  14:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected I know you asked only for semi, but this is an obvious vandal-magnet and if there is ever a valid reason to create an article here, then it can be unprotected (also by filing here.) KillerChihuahua 14:37, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Makecat 13:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 13:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 08:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  10:45, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Dlv999 (talk) 12:24, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 12:35, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Hopping IP keeps changing her birthname, despite being asked to take it to talk. Nymf talk to me 12:16, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 12:25, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated attempts to insert massive amounts of non-neutral, unsourced information. Article is under discretionary sanctions (Indian caste article), and thus extended semi-protection is warranted. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  10:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article has been semi'd at least twice, and as soon as it's over, a presumably dynamic IP keeps coming back to change the first lady to Carol Obama instead of Michelle Obama and to otherwise mess with the article. I suppose that blocking users as they come up is one option, however to prevent further disruption, I'd request the page be semi-protected. Thanks. Go Phightins! 04:51, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined The logs indicate no protections in the article's history. There has been one trouble user in the past month, and that IP has been blocked; no vandalism has since occurred. Should it continue under multiple accounts, re-request protection. Airplaneman ✈ 06:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don Cheadle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -

Urgent - obscene WP:BLP violations

Temporary semi-protection: Continual WP:BLP-violating vandalism, on both the article and the talk page. For example: article, article, talk page, talk page. It's really weird. Not your typical vandalism. The vandal sounds illiterate. Charles35 (talk) 01:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • (Non-administrator comment) Huh? The talk page has only been hit once, 11 days ago (I just reverted to the pre-vandalism version, from June 2011). You might have a case for PC-protection for the article, but with only 3 vandalistic edits this week, and several good ones in between, I'd personally advise waiting things out. I hope you don't mind, Charles (seeing as you and I go "way back" ), but I'm striking your "urgent" note; of course you can feel free to revert me, but I just don't really see anything pressing here. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 04:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The edit you cite as obscene is borderline RD2, but that's about it. Airplaneman ✈ 06:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IPs edit warring against consensus. Remember that any IP/editor working in MMA topics are under general sanctions. LlamaAl (talk) 23:35, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Article vandalized six times by several IPs in the past 48 hours, including 3 times in the past few hours. Suggest a week or two of semi-protection to cool things down. Jusdafax 07:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 07:33, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: Persistent IP disruption. Davey2010 Talk 04:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 07:36, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Article has been vandalized by several anon IPs for the past week. -WayKurat (talk) 04:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 07:37, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term vandalism, protected four times in the past. -- LuK3 (Talk) 04:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 07:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This page is now linked to every single category via the "Category" link. The page views have jumped dramatically and I have just this minute reverted some blatent promotion. Since it is now a high profile page I recommend permanent semi-protection and move protection. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Airplaneman ✈ 06:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP disruption. Refer to Talk:Dexter's_Laboratory#"Original_Run" for futher information. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 06:13, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Addition of spam, removal of maintenance tags. Paris1127 (talk) 22:58, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Airplaneman ✈ 01:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - the relevant links of Vox Novus New York City [1] deleted abusively by the Romanian Biruitorul--Phorion (talk) 13:20, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Airplaneman ✈ 00:48, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP edit warring over nationality. Binksternet (talk) 05:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Scottywong (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) recently added pending changes, and over the last few days, there have been only a few instances of vandalism. If pending changes proves ineffective, then reconsider semi-protection. Airplaneman ✈ 00:09, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Recent unnecessary modifications and vandalism made by IPs. A lot of modifications made before an episode airs, wrong spoilers, etc. -- Fabzzz (talk) 05:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined There seem to be quite a few helpful edits, too. I don't want to lock those possible contributions out. Airplaneman ✈ 00:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistant re-application of the same non-relevant, trivial, unsourced material by an IP editor. Cbbkr (talk) 21:26, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 01:24, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: 50.89.56.198/Homechallenge55 obsessively (dozens of times for nearly a year now, and will always revert on the very same day[37]) keeps redlinking Tranji Studios, an article that will never be created because they developed only 1 game (this one) before going bankrupt. No one but me really ever edits the article anyway. (Also, might be possibly doing the same thing in other such articles.) --Niemti (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I don't personally think that having the redlink is much of a problem, but I will leave another admin to decide what action, if any, they want to take here. J.delanoygabsadds 02:20, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined I'm also not convinced that page protection is the way to go. I see no concerted effort to discuss this with the user (just a post on the IP's talk page way back in May of last year). Please try some form of communication, and if this fails, dispute resolution. Airplaneman ✈ 23:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Labrinth (talk) 01:05, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question:. I don't see too much vandalism recently after taking a quick look at the page history, and I am loathe to protect pages unless it is pretty bad. Could you point out the edits that are vandalism? J.delanoygabsadds 02:14, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Airplaneman ✈ 23:19, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – An editor behind several IP-proxies (who is probably a banned user) removes information supported by both academic sources and all the users having valid (registered) accounts. Please, also see User_talk:DeltaQuad#Banat_of_Temeswar regarding this issue. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 23:47, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 01:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Sorry, I misread the history and talk page and failed to read the linked discussion. This should be good now. Airplaneman ✈ 01:09, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: This BLP page was previously semi-protected, and has recently been vandalized soon after protection expired. Indefinite semi-protection would be ideal, as having researched the subject, there are actually websites encouraging the vandalism of this page (Geoff Tate is a musician currently involved in legal proceedings). However, any amount of protection to this page would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. Friginator (talk) 20:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. We'll see where the subject stands in 6 months, and additional measures can be taken then. Airplaneman ✈ 01:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Pending changes isn't working here as sometimes the problematic edits are being accepted and with the persistence of these IPs and other accounts on this issue it is only proving to be an unnecessary burden. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 17:41, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 01:16, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Widr (talk) 23:41, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 01:03, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Highly visible template. Jason Rees (talk) 17:19, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected. Airplaneman ✈ 01:01, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Edit-warring by ip over unsourced changes to blp. --Ronz (talk) 16:17, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:57, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term vandalism, article is on the front page. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 48 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:38, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Just look at the history here. There are so many random IP addresses vandalizing the page and taking pictures out and just changing names for files so the page appears incorrect. Can you please protect it. This is too much to handle. How much times are we going to revert edits? . Ashermadan (talk) 23:56, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:46, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. - Unregistered IPs keeps adding upcoming movies ithout sources/proof and doing unnecessary thing almost in the whole article. Alphonsewan (talk) 08:44, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Currently ongoing high-profile mixed martial event. IPs are vandalizing resullts table. LlamaAl (talk) 23:37, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:34, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection Persistent vandalism from IPs and new single-purpose accounts. —Neotarf (talk) 07:58, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:30, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism target on the actual date of Australia Day, also some edit warring between people who should know better. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 06:46, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:27, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection If you check the history and use your browser to find the word "revert" you can see just how often this keeps happening. 13 times out of the past 50 edits seems a lot. That's 13 vandalism and 13 reverts, meaning half of the last 50 edits have been vandalism related. Please stop IP vandalism from this page. Dream Focus 06:27, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Blame the spike in traffic on Reddit :p. As for the history of vandalism, it isn't frequent, but you're right, the history is saturated with reverts, with nearly zero actually helpful anonymous contributions. Airplaneman ✈ 00:24, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandalism and BLP violations. -- LuK3 (Talk) 05:44, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:20, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of very badly written unsourced content - mostly likely by a non English speaker - who uses different IP address each time. Semi-protection would stop this and most likely user would get bored and move on. Biker Biker (talk) 10:44, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but still this illiterate numpty keeps adding the same crap to the article. We (it's not just me) shouldn't have to clean up this stuff repeatedly if there is an acceptable solution to stop it. --Biker Biker (talk) 13:20, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP originating vandalism. —Ryulong (琉竜) 07:21, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 23:21, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection Vandalism The list attracts anonymous IPs who repeatedly inflate sales figures without updating the sources or add unsupported/non-existent charts peaks.--Harout72 (talk) 01:51, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 23:19, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP vandalism. again.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:49, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It looks like normal editing to me; I 'm not seeing any vandalistic edits -- Dianna (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

28 January 2013

Indefinite Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. It has been semi-protected before but as soon as it expires, vandalism continues. Briarfallen (talk) 20:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-protection: High profile page. (No. 3858 on Wikipedia - over 100,000 page views per month.) Persistent IP vandalism. Long term semi-protection expired on 14 January, and since then all edits have been vandalism or reversions. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of for an indefinite amount of time, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:01, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Egregious BLP violations relating to recent events. ukexpat (talk) 19:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: MY CLASSMATE IS TRYING TO VANDALISE IT!. SmartyPantsKid, Signing off. 15:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Declined It is already pending charges protected. Lectonar (talk) 15:51, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple IPs vandalising article. — MST☆R (Chat Me!) 15:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There seems to be an ongoing running joke about adding made-up, humorous names to the "members" list (it stood at an epic 200 last August). McGeddon (talk) 16:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 16:31, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:76.31.155.94 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protect OR take away the user's talk page access. He's on block for disruption, and continues to disrupt. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined That's not disruption, that's querying the block, which he's perfectly entitled to do. GedUK  12:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I just reblocked with talk-page editing disallowed, because I think he is just repeating the legal threats. Lectonar (talk) 12:28, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will unblock, per my talk page. GedUK  12:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection or semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 01:46, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Seems to be almost entirely one IP. Better to take action against them. Warn them, then report to WP:AIV if it's vandalism. GedUK  12:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Highly visible template – Country data template with plenty of usage. Calhoun talk 00:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined 20 transclusions is not high visibility. Needs to be around 1000. GedUK  12:18, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Excessive vandalism from IPs. — Forgot to put name (talk) 13:52, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 15:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for two weeks, many IP vandalism issues that had to be reverted. Thanks. JMHamo (talk) 13:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:35, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite protection or semi-protection: Persistent long-term sockpuppetry by User:Vibhas Kashyap, whose modus operandi is to replace redirects—especially this one—with his preferred version of the target article. Indefinite full or semi-protection would help curb the behaviour, and since this is only a redirect page which should never need to change, protection is unlikely to cause any problems for legitimate editors. Psychonaut (talk) 13:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Airplaneman ✈ 14:31, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 08:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-hopping vandal. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 07:27, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been indefinitely semi-protected for 23 months. It has remained long enough, as there has been no recent activity of vandalism, and hopefully it is no longer necessary. --24.6.164.7 (talk) 03:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Apple's latest and greatest product is no longer this phone (now it's the iPhone 5); as such, I assume there's less traffic nowadays to this page (still quite hefty at a little over 5,000 hits per day. How about pending changes? I have posted on talk page of protecting admin Ged UK (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Airplaneman ✈ 05:53, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected Obviously there's been no vandalism, it's been protected against flybys. However, I think pending changes is a reasonable step 'down' as it were. If there's no vandalism attempts then maybe it could be unprotected. GedUK  10:35, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, iPhone 4S is currently not protected, but had been protected with expiry in the last year and earlier. There were no pending changes for that article. iPhone 5, the latest generation of iPhone, is currently edit semi-protected until 16:58, 28 April 2013 (UTC), and is currently indefinitely fully move-protected. How long will pending changes be reset for iPhone 4? --24.6.164.7 (talk) 19:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Now that anyone can edit the article, the amount of vandalism can be assessed. If vandalism is seen to not be an issue, un-protection is in order. Airplaneman ✈ 19:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Requesting immediate archiving... ‑Scottywong| soliloquize _ 14:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Repeated violations of the WP:BLP policy by two different IPs. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 10:29, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Makecat 05:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: or semi-protection: Anonymous editor keeps adding and changing unsourced voice actors from a "Gakuen Basara" show which does not exist, except in manga form. (Manga does not have voice actors.) User does not want to talk on any forums. When warned by a second editor, changed IP addresses and continued editing and now is back to the first IP. AngusWOOF (talk) 02:22, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A user consistently vandalizing BTBAM articles by removing reliably sourced material, and reverting it to the genres the sources did not consider it and denied it as. He was reverting edits by an IP who appeared to do nothing wrong. However on the band's alaska article, I didn't really see much trouble. On Obfuscation (song), he reverted edits which removed a genre which was unconstructive and unreliable and did NOT make a consensus or determine the genre, he said it did by listing whatever the band's genres are on their main page BTBAM. I've noticed he's gotten warnings NOT to do it but consistently removes them. He started the warring. But there was no argument til he came. He displayed NO consensus and removes sourced material. I also noticed his genre warring on a nine inch nails article, but is denying it. It seems he's genre warring there and making disruptive edits

Ihy34 (talk) 00:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not unprotected Given that I just fully protected the article, this is not a ripe request. Discuss the matter on the talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:08, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As long as disruptive edits won't be made, I think it's good.

Ihy34 (talk) 00:32, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not unprotected It's much too soon to know if the semi-protection is necessary or not. For the moment, the genre warring stopped. What reason is there to believe that it's not going to immediately resume if the semi-protection is dropped? Qwyrxian (talk) 08:09, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit war over the genres continues. No one wants to talk, they just keep reverting. Ridernyc (talk) 00:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. On this one the genre warring stopped after the semi-protection, so lets see if people can behave themselves appropriately there. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Several editors continue to edit war over the genres of this article depsite PPP being placed on it. Ridernyc (talk) 00:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:00, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – This page should not exist. FrankDev (talk) 00:06, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected Salted. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:58, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

29 January 2013

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous re-adding of links flagged as malware. ~ Matthewrbowker Make a comment! 20:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 21:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Indefinite semi-protection: The IP user who had been repeatedly vandalizing List of minor recurring characters in Star Trek: The Next Generation until I requested that page protected has now targeted my talk page for repeated vandalism in apparent retribution.

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Leave a note on my talk page if there's any further issues. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 17:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated – It's been created three times and speedied three times, so why don't we SALT it and drop Abilgin (talk · contribs) a note saying xe'll have to go through AFC if xe wants it re-created. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 12:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. ~ Soerfm (talk) 18:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The school year should be coming to a close by then. Airplaneman ✈ 19:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: A dynamic IP at 67.8.25.186 and 67.142.130.18 is consistently adding unsourced personal claims violating WP:BLP, despite two registered editors cautions and warnings in edit summaries, two IP talk pages and the article talk page. -- Tenebrae (talk) 16:43, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A dynamic IP is continuously removing the AFD template! . Tito Dutta (talk) 16:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC) I have been thinking to request this protection for last 12 hours. Note, the IP is doing good work but the only problem is they are erasing the AFD template. Most probably they are not understanding that they can't stop the article from deletion by just removing the AFD template! --Tito Dutta (talk) 16:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC) --Tito Dutta (talk) 17:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I know this page is not vandalized recently. But I'm asking to protect this to save it from vandal edits. Many people has some disliking with this kind of websites. So they can make vandal edits. And for this reason I'm asking for page protection. Pratyya (Hello!) 14:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Airplaneman ✈ 19:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – See history. Persistent vandalism by different users this month. Lova Falk talk 14:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected The frequency of vandalism is under the threshold for semiprotection, but I think Pending charges protection might be helpful, as it is a delicate subject. Lectonar (talk) 14:44, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Someone began to delete sourced info without giving any reason. Egeymi (talk) 12:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have warned for 3RR...we will see. Lectonar (talk) 12:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 12:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism in "Match win streaks per Grand Slam event" section. --Jdjerich (talk) 19:08, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined 1) It's not at all clear it's vandalism, more a content dispute. 2) Most of the people involved are confirmed users, so semi-protection won't work, and 3) Now that there's a discussion on the talk page, I'd hope that it can be resolved there at this point. Relist if it carries on, but it'll need full protection. GedUK  12:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection IPs and new users consistently adding unsourced episodes to the list. Maybe "Aliens Among Us" is real, since I've seen several sources that mention it (although those aren't necessarily reliable), but for episodes beyond that no source exists, and if there are sources they're pobably fan-made. This has been constant since about November, when Cartoon Network supposedly announced that the remainder of Season 2 would air on January 27 (which has come and gone, and no new episodes have aired). Black Yoshi (Yoshi! | Yoshi's Eggs) 04:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. seems to happen every year. GedUK  13:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Persistent Vandal changes. Andrew Wiggin (talk) 02:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done GedUK  13:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A user consistently vandalizing BTBAM articles by removing reliably sourced material, and reverting it to the genres the sources did not consider it and denied it as. He was reverting edits by an IP who appeared to do nothing wrong. However on the band's alaska article, I didn't really see much trouble. On Obfuscation (song), he reverted edits which removed a genre which was unconstructive and unreliable and did NOT make a consensus or determine the genre, he said it did by listing whatever the band's genres are on their main page BTBAM. I've noticed he's gotten warnings NOT to do it but consistently removes them. He started the warring. But there was no argument til he came. He displayed NO consensus and removes sourced material. I also noticed his genre warring on a nine inch nails article, but is denying it. It seems he's genre warring there and making disruptive edits

Ihy34 (talk) 00:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. The article is semiprotected for a cause; so consider dispute resolution. Lectonar (talk) 10:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edit warring, introduction of errors and vandalism from a range of newly created WP:SPA's (probably socks). ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 09:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Unregistered users edit warring. LlamaAl (talk) 23:54, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Ekabhishektalk 11:22, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. STATic message me! 18:22, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – This BLP article has been vandalized by numerous IP editors. Unsourced content has been repeatedly added by new editors and IP editors. Some of the content that has been added is potentially libelous. Judging from the number of page views, the article seems to have fairly high visibility. - MrX 14:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Has been Already protected. indefinitely. Lectonar (talk) 10:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism resumed a little over four hours after the last protect expired. The article will probably be subject to increased attention with the recent film; I would suggest six months to a year. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 22:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. More seems excessive at the moment; we can always reprotect. Lectonar (talk) 08:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism combined with unsourced content and personal comments.Egghead06 (talk) 17:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Race and intelligence (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Edit warring. Requesting temporary protection of Talk:Race (human classification) as well. GrayFullbuster (talk) 15:17, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Sole disruptive IP address has been blocked; no further need for semi-protection. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 04:51, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Users from different IP's are vandalizing this page with obvious spam and placing incorrect information. Reverted them back to the previous accurate version. Thanks Honor 11 (talk) 06:40, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 07:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection IP hopping vandalism, I request just a few hours of protection as it seems to just be one thing and/or the IP problem fixed - Thanks. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:09, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection Nearly all of the IP edits from the past year have been vandalism. 64.106.114.172 (talk) 03:50, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 07:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from various IP and new (sock puppet?) users. || Tako (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 04:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Warring with discussion occurring on talk page. Noom (t) 01:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Steady stream of IP vandalism with no constructive IP edits. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:44, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism resumed after last protection ended. Webclient101talk 02:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Connormah. --Webclient101talk 02:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism & violations of BLP. Webclient101talk 02:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Connormah. --Webclient101talk 02:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – There have been several good edits by IPs and new accounts, but there is also a lot of vandalism in brief spurts so PC protection would seem to be a good fit, perhaps with temporary semi-protection, given the vandalism over the past day. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 23:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected – Connormah (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List of Star Wars air, aquatic, and ground vehicles (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Third request for the talk page to have same semi-protection as article page. Vandalizing editor has hopped to a third IP (well, discounting IPs he's used in several previous *years*). --EEMIV (talk) 16:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Qwyrxian. --Webclient101talk 02:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request four month protection period to get through this semester, at which point school projects will be complete for the school year. Thank you. HarryZilber (talk) 22:47, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. – Connormah (talk) 22:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – IPs continuing adding sections "awards" & "controversy," which contain undue weight and non-neutral info, among other things. Issue has been discussed in talk page but is ignored. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 19:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. – Connormah (talk) 22:52, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I request the "Edward Smith" and "Sinking of the RMS Titanic" to be unprotected because I have seen things that need improving such as: Deleting Captain Smith wax figure paragraph becasue 1. It is unsocured. 2. There no mention of a wax figure in any Titanic book! There more I wish to explain but I need to edit thoses pages! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.172.0 (talk) 15:08, 28 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.172.0 (talk)

Declined You're just coming off several months of rangeblocks for disruptive, unsourced edits on a wide range of Titanic and Lincoln-related topics, and your present edits need to be closely reviewed. You're the reason the material was protected in the first place. Acroterion (talk) 18:22, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

30 January 2013

Indefinite move protection: Page-move vandalism – No reason for it to be moved, key vandalism target so semi should stay. Secret account 19:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected indefinitely. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: or longer--persistent longterm vandalism. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 19:42, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Master of Puppets.. Airplaneman ✈ 20:32, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Self-explanatory. Since he is asleep ATM, should defer to him on indefinite semi. GotR Talk 19:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 12 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Both vandals look like the same person, and they're now both blocked, but I've protected it for 12 hours just to make sure they don't come back under another name. Airplaneman ✈ 20:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: You only have to look at the page history to realize this is a highly targeted page for vandalism. I think a permanent semi-protection will stop this. Rcsprinter (lecture) @ 18:57, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism consistent since the start of the 2013 African Cup of Nations. Needs attention since I cannot keep up with reverting the edits by the numerous vandals. Thank you! Acmilan10italia (talk) 19:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Lord Roem.. Airplaneman ✈ 20:32, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. 98.166.123.54 (talk) 17:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 18:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. JDDJS (talk) 17:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 18:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – As can be seen in the history of the page, this page as been blocked recently for the same problem, and as soon as it becomes unblocked, the vandalism starts again. They are the same edit across multiple IPs, so it may be one person and more beneficial to just have those IPs blocked. None the less, the page is still being vandalized. . Favre1fan93 (talk) 13:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I see 4 IP vandalisms in the 5 days since the protection has been lifted; I will watchlist, though, and if it picks up noticeably, I will semiprotect. Lectonar (talk) 13:52, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article has recently become target of IP socks of blocked user who insult users who revert their edits. GrayFullbuster (talk) 14:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. LardoBalsamico (talk) 10:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – To protect this page from being vandalized. Pratyya (Hello!) 10:14, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if disruption continues upon expiry and I'll reprotect for longer. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection - persistent vandalism and unconstructive edits throughout the past months and year. It looks like a high traffic page prone to vandalism. - M0rphzone (talk) 06:49, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 07:24, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-Protection. Persistent IP/Single purpose account vandalism. Just look at the edit history. This article gets several pieces of vandalism per day and nearly no constructive edits. --Free Wales Now! what did I screw up?  01:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I only see a few a month, not several a day Mfield (Oi!) 05:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider change full protection to semi-projected on this page as the protection was placed some time ago regarding page moves, and there is an open move page request in progress. Additionally DAB page is missing a non controversial entry of Libyan Air Force (2011–present). Thank you Tiggerjay (talk) 21:28, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried talking to the protecting admin? Lectonar (talk) 09:39, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Full move protection seems ok, but I agree that full edit protection is not necessary. I've contacted the protecting admin on this matter. Airplaneman ✈ 22:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Airplaneman - not sure why I didn't think to just do that. :) Tiggerjay (talk) 00:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected indefinitely.

Pending changes: Ongoing BLP concerns, this time over the name of a minor accused of the crime, as opposed to the names of the victims. When Diannaa (talk · contribs) PC-protected this originally, it was somewhat higher-profile/more frequently edited than most articles we PC-protect, but honestly it did wonders. It drew experienced users' attention to an article at risk for every type of BLP/POV policy violation imaginable, and was even cited by some users as an exemplary case while requesting reviewership. This one's sort of like Newtown, Connecticut - it's just always going to be sensitive enough that it's helpful to have edits be subject to review. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 06:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mfield (Oi!) 06:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, section blanking. Controversial subject, so likely to attract vandalism and biased edits. 24.19.250.24 (talk) 02:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 06:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This has been protected for 4 years, after what looks like 10 incidents in 1 week. Seems like this didn't need indefinite protection. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 13:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected --> Pending-changes protected Page view statistics as shown here indicate very high traffic to this page. I'm not convinced total un-protection would not result in vandalism. Let's try pending changes. Airplaneman ✈ 20:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Was semi-protected for a year. Since the protection expired article has been hit with a slew of vandalism. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 05:42, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mfield (Oi!) 05:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary move-protection the article was just featured on xkcd as of 12:01am tonight, with a joke about the article being moved to a bad name. As with every other time an article is featured on xkcd, vandalism ensues for the next few months. The article should not need to be moved without discussion first anyway. Semi-protection for a week (or 3 days until the next xkcd) would also help.   — Jess· Δ♥ 05:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected.: edit=semi, expires 30 April 2013, move=full, indef) by Nightscream (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:39, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Long-term semi-protect: since the expiration of the previous long-term semi more than 1 week ago, persistent IP vandalism returns. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 04:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mfield (Oi!) 05:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 02:46, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 03:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Annoyingly high level of IP vandalism; appears to be increasing. Relatively few legitimate edits. Hertz1888 (talk) 02:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 03:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:75.71.217.106 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked – Misuse of talk page while blocked. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 01:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – BLP article has been pelted with IP vandalism leading up to the Super Bowl. DPH1110 (talk) 02:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 02:38, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, page blanking. Auric talk 01:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 01:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: A bunch of nonsense edits with some vandalism. Astros4477 (Talk) 00:22, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 00:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – One or more users from new accounts or IPs have been trying to convert from a redirect to an article, despite a complete lack of sources and talk page consensus to keep it as a redirect until sourced. The disruption isn't too heavy, but it's been fairly stead since December. Perhaps a few weeks will get the conversation back on the talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 23:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Unsourced changing of details due to speculation re change of club's. Short term to allow clarity on situation and stop current BLP breaches. Blethering Scot 22:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing confirmed as yet, unverifiable, Only speculation at this stage, 48 hours should be enough. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 22:48, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 23:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple IPs engaging in vandalism over the past few days, with spurts of vandalism over the last three weeks. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 21:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 23:09, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – While SuzanneOlsson (talk · contribs) is being investigated at WP:COIN, and in the meantime refuses to accept the assertion by others that she has a clear conflict of interest and continues to stuff the article with her own publications and website, I think it would be best to fully protect the article to give her a chance to calm down, have a cup of tea, and reflect on her actions. . Biker Biker (talk) 13:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Seems like the situation has cooled down for now. Airplaneman ✈ 19:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for one week. Unsourced edits from IPs... media rumours being added that need reverting. JMHamo (talk) 22:52, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:58, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:121.214.35.75 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism by anon 98.158.118.252 - probably sock of blocked user DVdm (talk) 17:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 17:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This has been protected for 5 years, after an OTRS ticket request, but the edit removing info responding to the OTRS request does not seem to have changed anything since that data still appears prominently in the page, so obviously semiprotection didn't stop the addition of that data, therefore either this should be fully protected or unprotected as the issue that precipitated protection still appears on the page. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 13:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Let's see how this goes. I've put the page on my watchlist. Airplaneman ✈ 23:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

31 January 2013

Semi-protection - IP editor persistently (for years) adding inappropriate individual to the article despite multiple editors reverting them and explaining why the entry does not belong on the page. This editor is the reason why the page has been semi-protected four times previously. - SudoGhost 21:34, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected The attempt by multiple IPs to force this information into the article despite consensus to exclude it has been going on for far too long. Shorter protections (including 6 months) have done nothing to deter disruption so I have semi-protected it for 1 year. If consensus should change prior to the protection expiring let me know and I will unprotect the article. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 21:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term IP Vandalism. - Happysailor (Talk) 20:40, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:44, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. - Happysailor (Talk) 14:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. by Elockid (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Airplaneman ✈ 17:42, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. - Happysailor (Talk) 14:30, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. by JamesBWatson (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Airplaneman ✈ 17:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism by IPs. — Forgot to put name (talk) 17:56, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 18:05, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism of residents section by IPs. Le Deluge (talk) 16:04, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – It currently has PC1 - upgrade to Semi?. - Happysailor (Talk) 15:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. by Elockid Lectonar (talk) 15:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Transfer speculation. Mattythewhite (talk) 17:45, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 96 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:46, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lugia2453 (talk) 17:42, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:51, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. - Happysailor (Talk) 17:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:45, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP activity that introduces poorly sourced critical material in a BLP. The need for semi-protection in this case is given in the fact that the article is subject to 1RR per ARBPIA -- so when I removed material earlier today on the grounds that it failed RS, it was almost immediately added back by an IP editor, and now I'm not able to remove it again. If it is to be subject to ARBPIA, then we can't allow random IP editors to do what they please. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:22, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 17:31, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit war over the player's height and weight. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 03:37, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. I have just both warned them about the warring, take them there on the next to revert the other. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:13, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 00:22, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 12:15, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – This is an important article and tere is a long time vandalism problem here. Mostly related to adding spam links/below standard site's links in external links section and/or adding defamatory content and/or adding own name as person's disciple and/or removing/deleting content. We requested a short time (3 days) protection during Vivekananda's 150th birth anniversary! . Tito Dutta (talk) 09:52, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Change: Or from another point of view, indefinite might be too much! 1 year should be fine! You can change the request to semi protection too (whatever you think will be helpful)! --Tito Dutta (talk) 09:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. We will see then. Lectonar (talk) 10:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Tito Dutta (talk)--10:11, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuously adding defamatory content! . Tito Dutta (talk) 07:56, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:00, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --Tito Dutta (talk) 08:39, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP adding copy vio material . Murry1975 (talk) 05:05, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's only one IP who has already been blocked - protection shouldn't be needed unless they switch IP and continue. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 05:11, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 07:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP disruption resumed after unprotection. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 04:33, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indef semi-protection: Taking into account the recent spate in vandalism edits, I don't see how there is any good reason for an IP editor or newly created account to be making edits to my userpage. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 02:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated removal of the copyvio template by multiple accounts. Psychonaut (talk) 21:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 00:26, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection Multiple instances of IP and new editor vandalism over the last few days. Not sure what has caused the uptick. Looie496 (talk) 03:42, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some short-term anon vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 03:01, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 03:25, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – BLP vandalism. SFK2 (talk) 02:58, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 03:25, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: If administrators are unwilling to follow the rules, there is no reason to cut out the rest of the editors. There's no need for full protection anyways, there's nothing that semi-protection and a couple of edit warring blocks can't handle. Note that I am requesting a decrease in the protection level. Ryan Vesey 01:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- Lord Roem ~ (talk) 02:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Basketball player who will likely be traded, but not yet, and attracting premature editing from IP editors. Mosmof (talk) 01:24, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 01:26, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The increase in advertising prior to its Superbowl advertisement has brought numerous IPs out of the woodwork to add stupid comments either inaccurate information or vulgar vandalism. The film's draw these people like honey, it requires temporary protection, ideally through Sunday's trailer debut. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 00:11, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 02:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Constant addition of unsourced speculation, regarding which club he will or will not move to, given the transfer windows closes in the next day or two, 48 hrs protection should be enough. . ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 00:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Tom Morris (talk) 02:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. BaldBoris 22:32, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Lord Roem. --Webclient101talk 00:22, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent edit protection: against all non-admins but myself. The IP user who had been vandalising List of minor recurring characters in Star Trek: The Next Generation then turned to vandalising my talk page has now started on my User page. It's only happened once, but I'd rather not have to waste time on a single more pass through this mess. Also, I had thought it would be common sense that aside from admins only the owning user should be able edit his/her own user page.

Semi-protected since full protection won't work. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 00:22, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Huge amount of vandalism today (probably by school children). Semi-protect will see them get bored and go back to self abuse and Pokemon cards. . Bob Re-born (talk) 20:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 21:04, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection What seems to be a pattern of invalid additions to this BLP by SPAs and IPs is starting up again. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 19:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. plus an SPI. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 00:14, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, same ongoing SPI. Thanks. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 00:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ http://www.voxnovus.com/composer/Liana_Alexandra.htm
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Archive/2013/01&oldid=1187823685"