Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive/2013/02

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2013

01 February 2013

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Numerous new vandalism-only accounts showed upon expiry of protection today. Long term-semi seems advisable. Sailsbystars (talk) 18:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:30, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. — Forgot to put name (talk) 17:45, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. for one day by SarekOfVulcan. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – BLP violations. IP adding spam links, unsourced contents and removing or blanking sections. Torreslfchero (talk) 13:40, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected., hope this helps as by that time the film hype after its recent TV premiere will die down.--Ekabhishektalk 15:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - The film releases today (February 1, 2013), worldwide. There are several IPs that modify the page for no reason. Types of modification are section blanking or adding external links that are against Wikipedia external linking policies. Arjann (talk) 12:40, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:32, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is an important article. And there is a problem of non-constructive edits/vandalism for a long time! Requesting pending changes/semi protection! . Tito Dutta (talk) 11:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Yes, the article is important, but so are nearly all articles on Wikipedia. But here I can see a fair amount of positive contributions of IPs/new users, so no pending changes protection, and it is not enough vandalism for semiprotection anyway. Lectonar (talk) 12:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101talk 15:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of another year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 15:27, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism that targets the religion of the school and generally insults the Catholic faith. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:49, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Also, just a reminder to leave a vandalism warning note on the IP's talk page. It makes it easier to assess the likelihood that they will keep vandalizing the page. Best, Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary protection: Persistent vandalism - User Alien arceus was once a user who was well known for adding fraudulent information on Bulbapedia, where I am high-ranking staff. It seems since his ban there he has followed me here, and has started adding false information to Rick Moranis's page as if out of spite for me. I can provide evidence to back up my claims if requested. Jo The Marten (talk) 22:23, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to fully protect the page because of one user. Give your evidence to the user on either their talk page or the article talk page, and if they insert false info deliberately we can look in to blocking. Prodego talk 01:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined (procedural) Lectonar (talk) 08:13, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just putting it here, and this is the last time i'll post in the same place as Jo i promis, but my name is Ron Petterson, not Christian Woods. Appartment blocks often share the same IP address at least where i live it does. and either way, whether i'm Christian or not is none of this guy's damn business. i came here to add good information and have no intent on adding false information to this site, so no need for block. Alien Arceus 10:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and edit warring. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, no edits for five days GedUK  10:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High levels of IP users vandalizing it's biographies of living persons policy including IPs removing it's reliable source to a fake date of birth. Steam5 (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined You mean this article? We had 2 IP edits in 2013, and 8 in 2012, overall. This is not in any way a "high" level of vandalism. Please read our protection policy. Lectonar (talk) 08:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism. –sumone10154(talk) 23:34, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined The overall level of vandalism is not high, and not all IP edits are vandalism. Lectonar (talk) 08:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: This guy appears to have upset some people, and after following on from PayMeMyMoneyOwed (talk · contribs) disrupting the page, getting blocked, and disrupting it again as an IP (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PayMeMyMoneyOwed/Archive), other IPs have been disrupting the article here here and here. Semi-protection would give everyone a chance to calm down while properly sourced content is found. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection this page has a long history of disruptive editing by IP and new users for a moderately high visible page. Additionally there is a COI issue with a named user that is being addressed separately over at COIN. Thanks Tiggerjay (talk) 21:51, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When considering this request, please note that this article also has several years history of prompt reverts of vandalism and problematic edits, and many constructive edits with detailed edit summaries, by an IP editor. 188.29.82.106 (talk) 22:53, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I would agree that there has been some positive contributions from IP editors; however far more IP edits reverted than constructive. Tiggerjay (talk) 02:40, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Looking at the article history, the level of vandalism is under the threshold for semiprotection, and the noticeable amount of positive IP contributions makes me refrain from using pending changes protection too. Some years ago, we would have said: just wachtlist and revert; so, I have added it to my watchlist. Lectonar (talk) 07:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rules of chess has been semi-protected for nearly 19 months. The admin that protected it retired April 2012. I think it should be unprotected now. I have it on my watch list and I usually check my watch list several times per day, so I can watch out for it. If the vandalism returns, I will ask for it to be protected again, but I think it is time to try it unprotected. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 00:52, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unprotected GedUK  10:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term dynamic IP vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 03:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. --Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-Protection: It already redirects to the proper target, so there is no need for further editing (the main article even has a hatnote to the disambiguation page), and has a ridiculously long history of vandalism for a redirect (>30 edits of mostly IP vandalism or reverting it). It looks to me like vandals target this page since the one it redirects to is protected. I'm worried what they'll vandalize next if THIS is protected... --Free Wales Now! what did I screw up?  02:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Also, last vandalism was past December. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:20, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Bad edits from two IPs, BLP article. The Interior (Talk) 00:39, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Protected by Materialscientist. The Interior (Talk) 00:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 06:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Many BLP issues, please protect for 1 week. JMHamo (talk) 23:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. Lectonar (talk) 08:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection. We have a 3 day old edit war by experienced editors - lets lock up the page and force them to just talk over talking and edit-waring - (related to Self-determination dispute - Protected Self-determination: Edit warring / Content dispute that will most likely have to be extended).Moxy (talk) 20:21, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Looks like things have calmed down. If any issue continues, please feel free to leave a note on my talk. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:24, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Dubious unsourced changes. STATic message me! 05:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Unsourced IP edits. STATic message me! 04:54, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Longer protection period b/c issues persist after protection earlier this month. --Lord Roem ~ (talk) 05:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request 24 hour protection due to strange spat of vandalism from numerous IPs. Govvy (talk) 22:07, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Over 10 different IPs doing edits to the article in the last hour, some of it unconstructive! :/ Govvy (talk) 22:26, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 22:45, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism. BenficaNNossaPaixao (talk) 16:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. Lectonar (talk) 17:00, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And I have warned both users about it. Lectonar (talk) 17:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked., both. Lectonar (talk) 18:37, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

02 February 2013

User talk:67.172.37.249 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked – Continuing disruption on his talk page because WP:TPV. Eyesnore 04:53, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. - Disabled the editor's ability to edit his talk page for the remainder of the block. EdJohnston (talk) 04:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Excessive vandalism from several anon. IPs. MacAddct1984 (talk • contribs) 23:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 06:16, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Dan56 (talk) 19:50, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 06:13, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi, maybe for a week or two, until the frenzy dies down. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:53, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected – One week by User:Qwyrxian. EdJohnston (talk) 05:20, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection vandalism after semi-protection expired, now with offensive edit summary that needs deleting. Peter James (talk) 23:58, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected - One year. I removed the offensive edit summary. EdJohnston (talk) 05:29, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent history of IP vandalism / reverted edits on a high-traffic article. ~Eric F 74.60.29.141 (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Ekabhishektalk 04:00, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101talk 01:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Materialscientist. --Webclient101talk 02:29, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated additions of unsourced information. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 19:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:30, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Article was semi-protected for 2 months, which seems uncharacteristically long for page with no appreciable history of vandalism and a single IP editwar that lasted only a few edits. The article itself indicates it is outdated, so on the balance, I would consider it to be better to unprotect this to open it up for more constructive IP edits than lock it down because of a minor altercation that happened 5 weeks ago. 76.121.244.252 (talk) 06:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You should contact the original admin who protected the article first. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 07:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined For the bot. You should ask EdJohnston (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) GedUK  10:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would have attempted to contact the admin, if he hadn't protected his own talk page. He has a special "talk page" for anons, but it appears that he does not monitor that page very diligently, often taking days to respond. I find making anons jump through hoops to communicate to be more than I'm willing to bear. 76.121.244.252 (talk) 16:44, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

03 February 2013

semi-protection: - IP vandalism. protect until after national final.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. (actually until 10 March). Lord Roem ~ (talk) 20:08, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – edit warring regarding position of song on Brazil Hot 100 charts; official Billboard charts list 63 as peak. over 12 edits in past 72 hours for this single issue, almost none from registered users as far as I know. L.cash.m (talk) 18:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 19:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: BLP policy violations – Quite a steady stream of BLP violations over the past month. A good candidate for PC. David1217 What I've done 17:27, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:20, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 17:09, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:11, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please unprotect this page. the only thing that happened is a little edit war that is not worth protecting a whole page.

Not unprotected Copious amounts of vandalism in recent times justify the one month of protection. Airplaneman ✈ 14:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I request to be allowed to put a paragraph about the supposed snapping antenna from Amelia Earhart's aircraft because I think it is in the wrong place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.15.158.103 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not unprotected Please use an {{Editprotected}} request on Talk:Amelia Earhart with your suggested changes. Airplaneman ✈ 14:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Two editors arguing over sourcing of a statement regarding how long show was #1 for the entire television season. There is a talk page discussion, but looks like needs to be frozen for a bit, just the same. McDoobAU93 16:45, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:00, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Seems like basically most of the edits here are vandalism. Refer to page history for more details. Arctic Kangaroo 16:09, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Airplaneman ✈ 17:01, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

temporary Semi-protection: - IP vandalism on GA article.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:16, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 13:20, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:36, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit warring on the page has been occuring for more than a month between two users, which have been blocked at least 2 times. Now, an IP has even joined in the "fun". . Arctic Kangaroo 10:50, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for 21 days by Master of Puppets (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 14:35, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

semi-protection: Check recent edits, and its mostly IP vandalism and reverts. Notice the times Yngvadottir reverted obvious vandalism he labeled it as "unconstructive" or "rvv". All other reverts are clearer, they reverting gibberish added in by IP vandals. Dream Focus 08:56, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term history of vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 07:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recently, some edit warring and vandalism on the page. Arctic Kangaroo 07:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:31, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: - persistent vandalism. - M0rphzone (talk) 04:56, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:30, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Cmckain14 (talk) 04:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:27, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 03:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:23, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandalism and BLP concerns. -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:58, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:18, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Band released first new album since 1991. Persistent IP vandalism due to this. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 01:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: - IP vandalism.--BabbaQ (talk) 01:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:09, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Constant, and long-term genre warring, removal of sourced genres, replaced sometimes with random genres by IPs who change it to their point of view or make weird edits. Been happening for a while. If it can't be indefinitely semi-protected then just for a while.

Ihy34 (talk) 00:21, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:07, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Widr (talk) 23:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:06, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Eyesnore 21:46, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 14:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced content. Protection expired on 29 January, and unsourced additions of future services, mainly from IPs, started again. Please consider a longer period.Jetstreamer Talk 13:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 13:59, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Warren Kinsella (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A page protection request has been made by another user on the article's talk page (Talk:Warren Kinsella#Request for help, page protection). -- Patchy1 REF THIS BLP 20:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Toddst1 already dealt with it? -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 06:42, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article is Already protected by administrator Toddst1.. Airplaneman ✈ 13:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: IP vandalism has been occurring over a long period of time. Living person article. Danrok (talk) 02:20, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 13:45, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Always a target for vandalism from IPs/unregistered users who often add speculation. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 23:33, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 13:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temp full - Just until the whole waitress firing hoopla dies down. The firing doesn't even involve the company known as Applebee's or its parent Dine Equity, it is an incident involving an Applebee's franchise. Additionally it has attracted several new single purpose editors and IP contributors whose sole goal is to advertise the incident and not improve the article. Spurious claims without proper support are being bandied about as to the importance of the event. Several editors have removed this as non-notable, but the same clique of contribs keeps readding it --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 05:43, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Steven Walling • talk 04:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Might you reconsider. It would only be for a week or two, this is turning into an edit war between the two factions. Most contribs are not participating in the discussion on the talk page and keep re-adding the information without discussion - ignoring BRD altogether. Please revert the most recent and lock it down so they will be forced to discuss the disputed information. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:09, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Ekabhishektalk 07:06, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Michael Felgate (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Eyesnore 22:32, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Felgate should be a disambiguation page, linking to List of foreign football players in Cypriot First Division#England and Mickey Blue Eyes - and the talk page should have a {{DisambigProject}} template, which would prevent inappropriate moves of other pages to these titles. Peter James (talk) 00:08, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, The main page has already been protected, and it'll just be a pain to recreate if actually needed. If it's recreated again after this, feel free to refile. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 06:45, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Recently a new Mersenne prime has been discovered, but the distributed computing project responsible for the search has not made an official announcement. IP users have added a new entry, but more importantly have changed "47" to "48" where they should not have done (i.e. the page says "48" but still describes properties of the 47th prime). I've reverted the edits until the official announcement, however if you look at the page history you'll see that the IP users have undone similar reverts by other registered users, and so they're likely to do it again. As such, I'd like to semi-protect this page until Tuesday (February 5th) at 1400 UTC, the time of the press release (see previous link). One might also consider semi-protecting Largest known prime number, however a cursory glance does not show any premature or wrong edits. Spartan S58 (talk) 19:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 06:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism resumed after last protection ended. Webclient101talk 01:45, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 06:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High profile MMA page. It includes UFC 156, a currently ongoning major pay-per-view event. IPs are vandalizing results and we just can't update them. LlamaAl (talk) 01:35, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. under IAR. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 06:55, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Lots of unsourced information consistently added included poor sources. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 20:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Steven Walling • talk 02:16, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: repeated insertion of WP:BLP violations. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Steven Walling • talk 04:40, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection This title has been used twice now to bypass create protection at Um Vichet. Sir Sputnik (talk) 10:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Steven Walling • talk 04:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent marriage (yesterday). Requesting a 3 days semi protection! . Tito Dutta (talk) 09:26, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Steven Walling • talk 04:21, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism from anonymous sources since the release of the album. Idiotchalk (t@lk) 01:22, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. Trying to revert all the vandalism in real time is proving close to impossible. WesleyDodds (talk)
I agree with the above, as the page is being vandalized more than 3 times per minute. FrigidNinja (talk) 01:39, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator Materialscientist. --Webclient101talk 02:19, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent addition of unsourced content, content violating MOS, copyright violations and just plain bad editing. AussieLegend (✉) 00:37, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Steven Walling • talk 02:26, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. IP tries to remove high quality source and isnert instead sources in violation of Wikipedia:Third-party sources or source of lower quality. MTYM (talk) 22:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Steven Walling • talk 02:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – High vandalism on a BLP. STATic message me! 22:10, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Steven Walling • talk 02:19, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Dubious unsourced edits. STATic message me! 22:08, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Steven Walling • talk 01:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Reported at WP:BLPN. IPs and new accounts continue to attempt to insert information about an alleged rape incident involving this person, however the sources rely on speculation and don't see to meet WP:RS. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 20:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Steven Walling. --Webclient101talk 02:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 19:28, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 21:13, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by dynamic IP. — Forgot to put name (talk) 19:01, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 22:53, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Incoming attacks. Webclient101talk 18:45, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Drmies. --Webclient101talk 19:00, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101talk 18:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 22:52, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

04 February 2013

Temporary semi full-protection: Persistent back and forth reverting. An admin had protected it but one of the participants thought he was too involved. Said editor has now gone and continued reverting since it was unprotected. Could an uninvolved admin now look at the situation and protect the page if they feel its necessary. -DJSasso (talk) 19:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Semiprotection will not do much good here, as virtually all involved are estabished users. This is (again) edit warring. But I see something of a discussion has picked up at the talkpage.... Lectonar (talk) 20:05, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Er my mistake I meant full protection. -DJSasso (talk) 20:06, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected After reading about the last 2/3s of the talk-page, I think it is time to fully protect again. If any other admin wants to undo the full protection, just go ahead. Lectonar (talk) 20:10, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 18:10, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of four days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. AussieLegend (✉) 02:22, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. I've left the involved users a note to cut it out. If they don't, ping me. Steven Walling • talk 04:31, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. (procedural) Lectonar (talk) 14:58, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 17:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Acroterion (talk) 17:54, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: persistent vandalism from IP (apparent WP:COI). There's an AfD debate going on for this page as well, and at least until that's decided it would be useful to have less back-and-forth reverting. --Brindt (talk) 12:51, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have left a 3rr warning on the IP's talk page....if they edit again today, they will be over 3rr. Lectonar (talk) 13:21, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Yes, it's one IP, better to take action against them than lock the page. Report them to WP:3RRN as necessary. GedUK  13:25, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Short semi or full protect: protect the version which excludes the image:Rizana Letter Tamil.JPG which is currently being discussed in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2013 January 14#‎File:Rizana Letter Tamil.JPG, albeit almost dormant. The anon 61.245.*.* insists the discussion is indecisive, thus justifying the inclusion of the fair use image. But others (including me) don't agree due to the fact that the said image is not mentioned in the prose nor cited by any reliable source, which is in many ways violates our non-free content criteria policy. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 08:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:38, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then please watch this page (at least temporary). I seriously feel the trend of slow/chronic revert war. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 13:20, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Fandilised (Vandalism + Fans) many times. . Robotdude101 (talk) 02:20, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Looking over the last week or so, there's been plenty of contstructive I{P edits, far outweighing the disruptive ones. GedUK  12:27, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When all redirects to HTTP 404 were protected, this was one of them, but protection was unnecessary as it shouldn't have redirected there and was probably created as a test page. It should redirect to Swift Creek, which I've made into a disambiguation page after moving the article. Peter James (talk) 01:05, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected GedUK  12:44, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Night (Disturbed single) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Talk:The Night (Disturbed single) (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

The Night (Disturbed song) was unprotected and created as a separate article, so this redirect and its talk page need updating, and protection of these pages is now unnecessary. Peter James (talk) 00:24, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected I've done the redirects too. GedUK  12:42, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – There have been constructive IP edits, but there has also been a lot of vandalism. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 07:17, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let's see how 6 months goes first. GedUK  12:36, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See request posted on the talk page. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:00, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Steven Walling • talk 07:18, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: persistent vandalism since last October. 61.18.191.5 (talk) 05:42, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let's see how pending changes copes with it. We can always go to semi protection later. GedUK  12:32, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit war between 76.118.130.14 and various other users. Moosehadley 05:38, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

I support the protection request, though not indefinite - it looks as if the editor is IP-hopping now to continue the edit-war. Oh, and only semi is needed, as the IP is warring to add unsourced personal opinion against a clear consensus. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator Materialscientist. GedUK  12:29, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ~satellizer~~talk~ 04:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation Protection: Article has repeatedly been created today as a promotional article. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 04:27, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Steven Walling • talk 04:33, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:16, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Steven Walling • talk 04:35, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of unsourced fancruft/misinformation from IPs. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:15, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Steven Walling • talk 04:25, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Zastavafan76 (talk) 20:35, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It looks like these edits by IPs are useful? Steven Walling • talk 00:25, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term IP vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 03:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Should be enough to get it under control. Acroterion (talk) 03:53, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term anon vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 03:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected One day for this one too. Protection can be scaled back experimentally tomorrow if desired. Acroterion (talk) 03:55, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Moosehadley (talk) 02:29, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Aaand this one too. Acroterion (talk) 03:57, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite salt. Used as an illustration of a red link at WP:red link. Not been a problem for a while, but no reason for it to ever be created, and if there were, we'd need to come up with a new red-link example anyway. — kwami (talk) 23:40, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - indefinitely salted back in 2010. Materialscientist (talk) 00:18, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – For an extended period of time, as this article suffers massively from chart inflation and chart vandalism on a regular basis. . — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 23:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I gave it another week to see if it will die down. If am being naive and it doesn't, feel free to drop another request here or to me directly. Steven Walling • talk 00:34, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs making premature edits; joins Manchester United in July. Mattythewhite (talk) 21:35, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Since this isn't all malicious vandalism, added pending changes. Steven Walling • talk 00:29, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Has been hit with repeated vandalism for three months with no indication of significant constructive editing by non-autoconfirmed editors. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 20:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. We'll see if a month is enough to discourage the kids. Acroterion (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

temporary Semi-protection: - vandalism.--Traveler100 (talk) 16:06, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 19:17, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Fairly high visibility, gets vandalized too often for my tastes. ResMar 15:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 19:16, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

temporary Semi-protection: - vandalism.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Ruslik_Zero 19:15, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

temporary Semi-protection: - vandalism.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:40, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Ruslik_Zero 19:14, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

05 February 2013

Semi-protection: Persistent removal of Hungarian official name by an IP. No such user (talk) 15:13, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I see the IP's talkpage is redlinked...perhaps you should try talking to him, and, if necessary, warn him. And if the problems persist, report at AIV. Lectonar (talk) 15:29, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection, edit warring that has spilled over from Talk:Mercedes AMG F1 W04 and Template:Formula One teams. Frietjes (talk) 20:41, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined for now. I warned both parties and have watchlisted {{Formula One constructors}}, so if it resumes I'll protect and/or hand out some blocks. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 16:55, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:History of Vojvodina (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – New auto-confirmed accounts now edit-warring with banners, requesting upgrading to full. Mdann52 (talk) 13:37, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This has beem brought up at AN/I Mdann52 (talk) 11:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined ANI can handle it, and today so far seems to be pretty calm. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 16:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: Repeated vandalism by different IPs. RJFF (talk) 10:02, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 15:04, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by an IP hopper. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 06:18, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 15:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Most IP edits on this page have been vandalism. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 01:29, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 15:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Back and forth reverting and reinserting of biased text.  [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 16:47, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. and Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 17:02, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent reverts of IP editors who keep adding directories of the courses offered by the university or lists that are generally miscellaneous or non-notable as per WP:UNIGUIDE. Xeltran (talk) 11:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 15:06, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: This template should be stable and not need editing from anonymous users, yet has come under heavy attack from activists/separatists. GotR Talk 22:48, 4 February 2013 (UTC) Semi-protected indefinitely. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 16:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite or, at least, long-term semi-protection, please. There were occasionally some insightful edits from IPs, but these are very rare and difficult to find because the history is flooded with vandalism, junk addition, reverts and searches for a vandalism which was overlooked a half-year before. If an unreg will want to add something, then the talk page would be a solution ever. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:26, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 15:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Some editor(s?) keeps removing parts of the infobox without seeking for a consensus or using the Talk page to discuss the problem. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 04:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for 3 days by Filelakeshoe (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). tutterMouse (talk) 14:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – String of IP address vandals over the past 4 days. . Harlem Baker Hughes (talk) 01:24, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 09:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending-change protection: Repeated spam involving edit war (?) by IP users / single-edit accounts, c.f. history (unfortunately, not all such edits have been recognized in the most recent clean-up edit). Se'taan (talk) 18:05, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 08:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Excessive additions of unsourced material. Reverted/removed said material, warned editors for adding unsourced info, see revision history. Platinum Star (talk) 15:57, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Lectonar (talk) 08:55, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Requesting unprotection as this article is the selected Today's article for improvement; see thread here. —Theopolisme (talk) 12:02, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected This is so bad a joke, but have Fun reverting the vandalism...I suppose the article will have enough watchers today :) Lectonar (talk) 12:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations. Webclient101talk 03:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Ekabhishektalk 09:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-Protection , I Want to take charge of that page.. i will add all the matches and post how the event went down and the background of it.. just protect it and make me the only one able to change it so other people don't ruin my work. thank you. ((Egy Time)) 4:35 AM

Declined (non-admin closure) You do not WP:OWN that page. ~satellizer~~talk~ 05:13, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandals striking almost immediately after the end of previous protection; of the 24 edits made after the template expired, 8 were made by me either fixing or reverting vandalism, whereas about 7 were bouts of vandalism (ranging from obvious to subtle). The other third was minor cleanup or corrections. The article has a long history of vandalism, including several temporary blocks. However, the previous protection worked wonderfully, and made the article stable. Based on previous results, I request this block. Furthermore, since vandalism starts up immediately after the block ends, I'm requesting indefinite status. Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:50, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. As the article is rather stable, I think this should be enough. Lectonar (talk) 08:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Just about every IP edit has been that of vandalism; IP vandals striking almost immediately after the end of a 4-month protection; BLP article has a long history of vandalism, including two one-year blocks. DPH1110 (talk) 00:15, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only one IP edit on February 4 since Feb 2 protection ended.—Bagumba (talk) 01:02, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Temporary semi-protection. Repeated violations of the WP:BLP policy. (and a hefty slice of edit warring) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:33, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. for one week by Ponyo. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 20:26, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if issues continue upon expiry and I'll reprotect for longer. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

06 February 2013

Semi-protection Constant sales updates without references. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:23, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:26, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Yobol (talk) 18:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. for three months by User:KillerChihuahua. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:26, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Persistent vandalism – Page is being vandalized by IPs and named users. Paris1127 (talk) 18:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editing here continues to be uniformly vandalism, mostly related to the YOLO meme. BDD (talk) 19:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:18, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, including persistent attacks by the sock puppet of an ArbCom-banned user. Hawkeye7 (talk) 18:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Courcelles 19:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: IP editors from Makati and Quezon City adds non-SkyCable channels has least only one cable/satellite provider. ApprenticeFan work 15:40, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That whole page might be in violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY but it's not in mainspace so probably moot for now, userspace request for protection seems fine to me otherwise. tutterMouse (talk)
Semi-protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – This article has been re-created 5 times in 2 days. Each time it has been deleted. Osarius - Want a chat? 13:53, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by User:Acroterion. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Harsh (talk) 13:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. for three months by User:Lord Roem. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:20, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Anon IP keeps removing content which has since been cited with reliable and verifiable sources. Bidgee (talk) 12:26, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It's one IP, so better to take action against them via WP:AIV once they've been adequately warned. The other IP seemed to have removed unsourced stuff, so that's to be commended. GedUK  13:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Users continuously add true BUT unsourced information. I have added the references to the unsourced information, but the page may need to be temporarily protected. JC · Xbox · Talk · Contributions 05:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Long term IP vandalism. Ihy34 (talk) 03:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There might be a case for pending changes, but I still don't think the level is anywhere near high enough, nor is it always clear cut that it's vandalism. GedUK  12:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes: High level of IP vandalism on 1960 ranked MEDRS article. RDBrown (talk) 11:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:06, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Can we have a permanent or much longer period of semi-protection reinstated on this article please? The muppet whose actions resulted in semi-proection for the last two times is back again. Clearly this idiot will keep returning whenever the article is unprotected. Thanks. . Biker Biker (talk) 09:34, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I pondered pending changes on this, but there seems to be so little other edits to the article that the only work will be to reject their edits, so semi is probably better. I'd like to give it one last try before indef. GedUK  13:01, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 07:58, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Only recreated one time. Lectonar (talk) 08:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consistent NPOV editing from IP users, refusal to discuss edits including removal of cited content. The article is highly contentious as a look through the edit history would show. GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 06:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It's pretty infrequent, but persistent, so I think that on a low edit rate article like this pending changes may work better than semi. GedUK  12:56, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Jim1138 (talk) 10:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I think this would help till the recent media interest lasts. --Ekabhishektalk 10:55, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated insertion of redlinks and unsourced people in violation of WP:NLIST. . Qwyrxian (talk) 10:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Ekabhishektalk 11:01, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Repeated recreation of a deleted article. E Wing (talk) 09:37, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected Deleted and salted. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:13, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 07:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Lectonar (talk) 08:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: The genre wars are over. However, the sources for when they formed SPECIFICALLY say it was 1992, NOT 1993. However, random IPs keep coming in and constantly changing it to 1993, and even when you switch it back, it comes again. Additionally, there is also persistent vandalism. I'd say protection for quite a while just so nobody vandalizes the page.

Ihy34 (talk) 01:36, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:02, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: Edits from IP users are being tagged for BLP issues and vandalism. Kaheathe (talk) 18:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 00:26, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term vandalism since late January. -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:46, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism the last few days. Dianna (talk) 02:23, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:47, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP Vandalism . Harlem Baker Hughes (talk) 02:15, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if vandalism resumes upon expiry and I'll reprotect for longer. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User request - Requesting protection for the userpage of my legitimate secondary account. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 00:51, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Mark Arsten (talk) 02:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Harlem Baker Hughes (talk) 00:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:00, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:58, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Never ending IP vandalism.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 22:36, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP 173.53.53.233 keeps using the page for promotional purposes. . Harlem Baker Hughes (talk) 21:47, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 02:56, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: As Mardi Gras season progresses this page (and other related pages such as Mardi Gras in the United States and New Orleans Mardi Gras) sees increasing IP vandalism, 2 in the last hour or so. For the last several years this page has been semi-protected for a week or so surrounding the actual date (which is the 12th this year). Protecting it now would save on the headache of cleanup between now and the 13th. Heiro 19:58, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:54, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism. Moosehadley 20:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. – Zombiedude101 (talk · contribs). Inclined to wait to see if full protection needed (it's already been semi'd). BencherliteTalk 20:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by anonymous users. IP vandalism regularly returns following each expiration of previous page protections.  —Waldhorn (talk) 18:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There is some vandalism, but not more than at other somewhat 'popular' pages. I have watchlisted, and will see if pending changes protection might be necessary. Lectonar (talk) 21:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Hi. This article has proven to be a controversial topic, as its "Malware issues" section has been a target of constant blanking (vandalism). . Codename Lisa (talk) 11:45, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There were only 4 instances of blanking in the last 4 weeks; this is in no way 'constant'. Lectonar (talk) 21:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editor(s) behind proxys (very likely sockpuppets of a banned user) repeatedly vandalize(s) my Talk page by posting disruptive editing warnings, just because we have a content dispute with respect to the Košice article - where (s)he frequently tries to remove information from the infobox which I find important. These strange "warnings" starting to become annoying, please, temporarily semi-protect my Talk page. Thank you for your help in advance. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 10:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined for now; topic is at ANI; if this picks up, just ping me. Lectonar (talk) 21:36, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent IP vandalism. Harlem Baker Hughes (talk) 22:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:28, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long history of persistent IP/new user vandalism. Deli nk (talk) 20:15, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:22, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Insertion of unsourced material (esp. birthdate) and attempts to use SPS to verify BLP info. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Harlem Baker Hughes (talk) 23:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and IP sockpuppetry. Harlem Baker Hughes (talk) 23:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Someguy1221. Materialscientist (talk) 00:16, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request indefinite semi-protection. Repeated vandalism by different IPs.Bearpatch (talk) 17:24, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. User:85.90.91.82, the only IP editor since January 1, was blocked by User:Dougweller for 72 hours.—Bagumba (talk) 18:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection, per WP:RTV -- Trevj (talk) 15:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Materialscientist (talk) 00:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Indefinite full protection, per WP:RTV -- Trevj (talk) 15:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Materialscientist (talk) 00:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

07 February 2013

temporary Semi-protection: - vandalism.

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: multiple daily spam entries to this unreferenced article (mostly IP edits) repeated addition of "sales outlets". Mjpresson (talk) 17:49, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:31, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism regularly returns following previous expirations of page protection cases.  —Waldhorn (talk) 17:42, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:33, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruption: an IP-hopping editor has been repeatedly edit warring since last year to introduce inappropriate content against consensus. It was semi-protected in January because of this problem, but it persists now that the protection expired. Deli nk (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Until April 8th, one day after the event has taken place. Much edit warring and unsourced material added. . – Richard BB 16:59, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if issues continue upon expiry and I'll reprotect for longer. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:26, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Until Feb 18th, one day after the event has taken place. Much edit warring and unsourced material added. . – Richard BB 16:59, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:24, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – IP and new users adding unsourced contents and also spam links. Torreslfchero (talk) 16:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:23, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article is a perpetual vandal magnet. Since the last 6 month semi-protection expired it has been hit repeatedly - dozens of times in just the last couple of days. Deli nk (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 16:30, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Pretty much nothing but vandalism, but intermittent enough that I think PC would be worth a shot before semi. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 15:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 15:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Random IP users constantly removing content from page. It's become a daily occurrence. Recollected (talk) 00:06, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Indefinite semi-protection: IP address keep changing the status of this album from EP to studio album without engaging in discussion despite their being a previous consensus at Talk:Headlines! that as the term mini-album is no longer used by the industry EP is the next common term. . — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 17:58, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 13:44, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

temporary full protection - edit dispute.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:57, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Also, not enough recent activity to justify protection. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 05:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – http://darraghmacanthonys-mri-owes-me-money.blogspot.co.uk/ by user User:Woncourtcase being used as a reference. WP:NLT might come in, but apparently its after a court case. User has already edited off of IPs to add source not from RS's to article. Murry1975 (talk) 17:41, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, We are not WP:ANI. One user's edits don't justify protection. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:57, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Another user has been making mass deletions to sourced contents by giving false edit summaries. No one reached a unanimous agreement on the removal of a well sourced section. Though i reinstated the original revision, the user seems to be making the same reverts. Hari7478 (talk) 16:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 05:42, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Recreated twice today. First time as an autobiography (A7) and the second time it was blanked by the creating user (G7). Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 04:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done KillerChihuahua 04:49, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Binksternet (talk) 17:26, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lets let them try talk it out first. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Binksternet (talk) 17:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lets let them try talk it out first. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:50, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Some major changes were made by another user where factual data has been altered. I've reverted it back to the original revision. But the user keeps making the same revert. The user is yet again making mass changes/deletion of sourced content, soon after the unprotection. Despite other experienced editors' decision on "not including sources that are too old"(see article's talk page), the user has been making warring reverts without paying any heed to comments, by using pressurizing tactics. Please protect the page for a longer period, until a decision/conclusion is reached. The user has been making mass changes without consensus. Hari7478 (talk) 16:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly refer to ANI complaint filed against Hari7478 here and Hari478's lack of response to the 4 issues raised for misquoting sources. He merely evades answering, reverts page to his version and seeks page protection. Unless Hari7478 agrees to answer on ANI page or elsewhere (on why he misqotes sources to pass off his own racist theories), his requests for page protection should not be allowed. He is merely vandalizing Iyengar and Vadakalai articles. --= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 19:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Mayasutra[reply]

Although the decision in the talk page was "to not use sources that are too old", Mayasutra has been deleting the existing version of the section and has been contributing data with sources(which are old) that appear to be citing even older sources. Yet he says the sources aren't old(false edit summary) - see here - [1], and has been deleting major portions along with their sources. By the way he has also been using names in edit summaries and has been maligning me(false accusations/personal attacks) by repeatedly mentioning my username in discussions and edit summaries - See here:[2], [3]. I'm also posting a few diffs that are evident of Mayasutra's abusive & disruptive behavior in talk page discussions & edit summaries(in the past) - [4], [5], [6]. Although this is not the page to make these complaints, i had to respond to the above comment. Please protect the page. Hari7478 (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Lester is not an old source. Sitush himself used Robert Lester as a source when referring to etymology of Iyengar. The issue is misquoting sources. Kindly refer to the ANI links provided. Hari7478's passes off his own fabricated conclusions by misquoting sources. As on ANI page, I stand by my statements that Hari7478's racism theories are half-baked and his statements are meandering (and I am not being abusive by saying so -- its a fact as anyone can check for themselves). IMO Hari7478 is consistently misusing wiki machinery to protect his misquoting of sources. Each time he reverts to his own racism version, then asks for page protection, reports me for vandalism, sock-puppetry, While NEVER answering on ANI page why he is misquoting sources. Thanks. --= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 22:41, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Mayasutra[reply]

The Iyengar and Vadakalai pages need to be protected from Hari7478's version. Hari7478 did not agree for mediation, did not reply on ANI page both times, and goes on reverting for an edit war. He merely puts up his own version, and asks for page protection so that no one can change it or challenge it. Before he seeks page protection, Hari7478 has to answer on the 4 issues raised against him, on misquoting sources, at the ANI page here --= No ||| Illusion = (talk) 22:59, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Mayasutra[reply]
User(s) blocked. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:48, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recurring addition of unsourced statistics; has previously been protected, but the issue persists. Mattythewhite (talk) 14:01, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. ...after appropriate warning, of course. Lectonar (talk) 22:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Cindy(talk to me) 04:53, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 05:41, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection Just a for a little, afterwards we revert to semi-protection. Now registered users are vandalizing and changing the formation year consistently to 1993 despite the sources SPECIFICALLY say it's 1992.

Ihy34 (talk) 02:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator GB fan.. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 05:40, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary full protection: Blocked user, removing administrator's blocking templates in favor of, um, embarrassing self. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 01:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Tenaciousd54 continues to vandalize it. Cmckain14 (talk) 20:58, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 05:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection BLP violations and timewasting edits.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 20:54, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Pending changes enacted, indef to deal with many of the issues. If the vandalism slope increases, feel free to request protection. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 05:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Cmckain14 (talk) 04:03, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 1 year. KillerChihuahua 04:47, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Request semi-protect or pending changes, lots of anon IPs adding vandal content as this guy's story is running through the media. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:48, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 05:16, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – Long history of BLP violations by non-autoconfirmed users. PC protection would be good. Mark91it's my world 19:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. There is more vandalism than good edits. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 05:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Binksternet (talk) 17:37, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – since January 7. SMP0328. (talk) 01:45, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Latest IP also blocked. Acroterion (talk) 01:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protection. natig98Bot 23:21, 6 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natig98 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 6 February 2013‎

Not done that is the user page for a blocked user, which (until I deleted it) had misleading information about it being an authorised bot. BencherliteTalk 23:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism from school itself removing information it doesn't like. C. 22468 Talk to me 16:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 22:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

08 February 2013

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Moosehadley 19:06, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:35, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Outbreak of vandalism from multiple IPs due to horsemeat scandal. Jnzbra (talk) 19:06, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:34, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: The page is currently a redirect, but Dorner has been named as the suspect in the 2013 Southern California shootings. People keep trying to make a dedciated article for him, despite a) a total lack of information about him, an b) WP:PERP, which states that "A living person accused of a crime is presumed not guilty unless and until this is decided by a court of law. Editors must give serious consideration to not creating an article on an alleged perpetrator when no conviction is yet secured." and also that "A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person." I'm requesting full protection so that the page can stabilise. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 10:40, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Suggest taking it to WP:AFD for further discussion. ‑Scottywong| spout _ 17:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection one month as per WP:PREFER - let get this two editors involved talking over editwaring - I suspect they will both be blocked "again for this" - but this has not helped in the past. Lets lock it up force them to just talk.

NOTE: This Is It (concerts) is there other battle ground and is unprotected as of today - this should be extended.Moxy (talk) 08:16, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. ‑Scottywong| gab _ 17:15, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Outbreak of vandalism from multiple IPs and new accounts. Rivertorch (talk) 18:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – Article is often being changed from a redirect into a strange article combining detail about the school with Premier League football statistics. The drive behind this seems to be to get the school to change its start time to enable pupils to stay up late to watch football. There are also threats about destroying the school if this doesn't happen. Odd. Bazonka (talk) 17:45, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if confirmed users start edit warring and I'll upgrade. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:35, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – This page is a magnet for vandals, largely due to the subjects popularity. A brief browse through the page history will show months of vandalism and BLP violations occurring on a daily basis. A weak protection such as PC would help most of it from reaching the eyes of readers while still encouraging positive edits from new users. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 17:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 18:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Perhaps just a short-term one, such as 1 week. Because persistent vandalism for past 3 days. Arctic Kangaroo 16:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistant vandalism that continually disrupts this article. Camyoung54 talk 15:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:33, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Lots of IP edits going on, with unsourced content being added and removed without reason, vandalism, and what appears to be an attempt by an IP editor to turn the perpetrator into a folk hero by likening him to Batman. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 11:51, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:30, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism on the page, whose subject is Google doodle for today. Semi-protection for 3-4 days would be perfect to prevent disruption. Amartyabag TALK2ME 14:07, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:24, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending-change protection: BLP policy violations – IPs adding rumors that he has passed away. Torreslfchero (talk) 12:23, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 5 days by MikeLynch (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 15:24, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Article page is being persistently edited by anonymous IP editors inserting unsourced, speculative fan claims about the show Total Drama: All-Stars. Should be semi-protected to prevent IP editing until the show debuts. Creativity-II (talk) 11:07, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: BLP policy violations. ~satellizer~~talk~ 07:55, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 13:40, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IPs continue to add Garuda Indonesia without a source and with no exact date. Snoozlepet (talk) 07:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:26, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The series is quite popular and has stirred up controversy, which are contributing factors that have been making the article a target for vandals. Various editors have been reverting vandalism numerous times but it's getting out of hand. Recollected (talk) 02:47, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:22, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Edit warring and IP vandalism. Ping Fu is the subject of a human flesh search attack at the Amazon.com forum on her book, and some of the messages there are sending people to WP, to edit her BLP. Fearofreprisal (talk) 05:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for 2 weeks. tutterMouse (talk) 12:53, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit warring on this page seems to be stirring up again. The last full protection expired 3 days ago. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 01:55, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Since ANI discussion regarding this article is also undergoing dispute, this should help, let's hope a consensus is reached soon. --Ekabhishektalk 03:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Faster2010 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 01:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It appears that the user has only blanked his talk page once, according to his/her history log. I don't think that's enough to justify protection. Usually, talk page protection is more so if they start to abuse the unblock request template, extreme and persistence vulgarity, etc. Icestorm815 • Talk 04:33, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Light yet persistent vandalism by multiple IPs. I'm seeing a couple good faith contributions so PC seems appropriate. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:33, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 5 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I honestly saw very few non-vandalistic IP/new user edits. The few "good" edits I saw didn't add anything of substance, so I think the best solution here is to protect until the school year ends. Airplaneman ✈ 01:48, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The "Moore in Roger" guy is back. Please help. Manway 01:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 01:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: If I ever unretire, I would like this protection revoked. However, until that time, it apparently is necessary for this page to be fully protected as I am completely out of patience (and it's not because of Phightins, Gwickwire, John F. Lewis or Addshore). If somebody thinks that they would like something changed, they can ask me about it and I can ask an admin if I agree. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 00:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected - I was almost going to ask you if you wanted it to be protected, have a nice wikifree time! ·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 00:30, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP vandalism by block-dodging IP-hopping sockmaster User:Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:44, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection or temporary pending changes: I suppose I'm involved, so I'd like someone else to have a look please. Several anons and new users are persistently adding this guy, a hatchet-wielding, triple-smashing internet folk hero, to the "notable natives" section. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 23:53, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from various IPs. Article had previously been protected for one week in January, vandals have returned. AD (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:45, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent edit warring/vandalism from IP-hopping editor.Moagim (talk) 21:21, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This is beyond sketchy. It may be someone experimenting. Hopefully two days is enough. Airplaneman ✈ 22:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent edit warring/vandalism from IP-hopping editor.Moagim (talk) 21:21, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: This article had been flagged with multiple issues, including "major contributor appears to have a close connection with the subject," and "improper reference to self publishes sources." I am in the process of re-writing it, drawing extensively on reliable, secondary sources. However, yesterday, a couple of new accounts came in and inserted at the beginning of the article a long essay that is entirely unreferenced. It appears to be written by people who are close to a major personality mentioned in the article. I reverted their addition, explaining why briefly in the edit summary, and at more length on the talk page. I also went to these editors talk pages and posted notes of explanation. In the meantime, I believe this page needs some level of protection. Thank-you! EMP (talk 20:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC). EMP (talk 20:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:26, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent edit warring/vandalism from IP-hopping editor. Deli nk (talk) 20:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:00, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Pending changes isn't working very well here: no constructive ip/new user edits but plenty of unconstructive ones. Vacation9 19:56, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Airplaneman ✈ 22:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: The ip's and SPA's returned soon after the page protection was lifted. No one has attempted to discuss the matters, nor provide sources. --Ronz (talk) 18:02, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:02, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

09 February 2013

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ★ satellizer ★★ talk ★ 07:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. I've blocked the editor. KillerChihuahua 13:14, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Recently deleted BLP – Although only re-created once, it was within a day of each other, an is likely to be re-created again. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 06:21, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Deryck C. 17:06, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Sudden surge of vandalism level over past few days, but have a few constructive edits from IPs, thus requesting PC. Arctic Kangaroo 05:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Deryck C. 17:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandals keep coming back; I think this page has been semi-protected before, but as soon as it expired, they returned. Long period of protection please, at least a few months. – Michaelmas1957 (talk) 20:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Deryck C. 17:13, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits by community banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:52, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits by community banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits by community banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:50, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits by community banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits by community banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits by community banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits by community banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits by community banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits by community banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 14:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent unsourced additions. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. KillerChihuahua 13:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent persistent IP vandalism. - MrX 13:05, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. KillerChihuahua 13:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection - persistent vandalism and unconstructive edits beginning before 2011. - M0rphzone (talk) 07:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. You have a month, anyway, of IP-vandal-free editing. Come back if they do. KillerChihuahua 13:18, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. ★ satellizer ★★ talk ★ 07:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Semi'd for a year, this is not the first time this has happened. Dunno why Bale is such a target, but he is. KillerChihuahua 13:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – With being re-created 6 times in 7 years, it is likely to happen again; if it can be created in a constructive manner, it can re requested to be unprotected. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 06:23, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. KillerChihuahua 13:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The article is being vandalised by IPs. The subject of the article was convicted in a "high profile" case, and was hanged to death today. . Amartyabag TALK2ME 05:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. KillerChihuahua 13:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: An IP-hopping editor is repeatedly making questionable and in at least one case BLP-violating edits [7] to this article in response to recent media coverage, which is getting a lot of play on Wikipediocracy. It's quite probable that this is a banned individual seeking to stir things up here. The likelihood of abuse would be much reduced with some temporary semi-protection. Prioryman (talk) 23:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

i cant help that my ip is dynamic. Prioryman wants to omit an important aspect of Gibraltarpedia, possibly for personal reasons. perhaps he could insert the relevant info in a way that he finds more acceptable? 174.141.213.11 (talk) 00:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. KillerChihuahua 13:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:48, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 4 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 06:30, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ★ satellizer ★★ talk ★ 23:59, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:05, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ★ satellizer ★★ talk ★ 23:55, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. BaldBoris 02:58, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The article is coming under repeated attack from IP and non-autoconfirmed users (specifically, by adding nonsense to the infobox). Could a brief period of semi-protection please be imposed?. SuperMarioMan 02:48, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:55, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 01:39, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – 10 edits today, SHOUTING in talk pages, edit warring messages in the summaries. Issues involve topics which have been repeatedly hashed over in the last couple of monts. I have no involvement in the dispute, but think a cool down will help. – S. Rich (talk) 00:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is a perennial target for vandalism. As soon as the last PP comes off it starts up again. Make it a long time or permanent. Jojalozzo 22:20, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if vandalism continues upon expiry and I'll reprotect for longer. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There is a controversy somewhere off-wiki regarding this company. IP editors have repeatedly entered what can best be portrayed as "rants" about various issues they have with the company. The last one then personally attacked me with a rant on my talk page here. I really don't even know or care what the company is about. I was just reverting the POV and it got me bit. No good deed goes unpunished. Gtwfan52 (talk) 21:50, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Eyesnore (pending changes) 21:46, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already done. by Bongwarrior. Torreslfchero (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done - I usually prefer to leave it unprotected, but it was getting kind of ridiculous. Thanks for looking out. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection while edit war is going on. I'd fully protect it myself but I had already sided with an IP editor (removing completely non-neutral text) before I noticed that this article is heavily fought over for at least two days. Send them to the talk page. Drmies (talk) 20:27, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

10 February 2013

Semi-protection: from constant long term IP vandalism Span (talk) 11:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 14:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Continued re-creation within 1 week. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 06:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 09:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Just saw some section blanking that was in the article since June. Seems vandalism can get drowned out with all the non-autoconfirmed edits going on, but since those are so substantial semi-protection seems inappropriate. PC should be better at catching the vandalism. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 04:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 16:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Harassment. Makecat 12:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 12:37, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There were many vandalizing edits in the last few days. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 09:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 09:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Has had a lot of vandalism recently. Bobherry talk 21:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 06:07, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent unexplained deletion of content by IP. Ruby 2010/2013 03:20, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. AIV is the best place to report one IP. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Wikipedia Page. Bobherry talk 01:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined According to the protection policy, pages should not be preemptively protected (except for a few special cases). There has not been any vandalism to this page since November 2012. Mike V • Talk 02:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: There has been multiple IP addresses that have only contributed by adding unsourced information. After nomination of FL removal it has been cleaned up and requesting this be protected to prevent IP's from adding unsourced information again. JayJayWhat did I do? 18:39, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:38, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 06:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 06:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: One year semi-protection ended on January 28, 2013. Since that time, IPs have repeatedly vandalized the article. One IP removed all of the text. Request restoration of temporary semi-protection for a period of one year. Corker1 (talk) 03:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:54, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Persistent IP vandalism for weeks. A burden on editors. -- Wikipedical (talk) 00:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I used pending changes protection because a couple of the IP edits were constructive and I don't wish to discourage that through semi-protection. Mike V • Talk 05:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 00:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:48, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High amount of recent vandalism. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 18:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:45, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – The editor in opposition of this ideology seems to fill it with un warranted and non verifiable allegations.Just trying to put criticism and non constructive edits in to Article.It should be protected. Shabiha 14:36, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:37, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism or use as a test page by multiple new accounts. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 14:44, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Given the recent articles surrounding LAPD, this is only the tip of the iceberg I believe. Formally request page protection. Jab843 (talk) 02:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 23:39, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 23:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. TBrandley (what's up) 20:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nyttend (talk) 03:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Has been a long-term target for vandalism and BLP violations, but also sees many constructive edits from non-autoconfirmed users. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 17:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected I don't see any protections for longer than a month, so I'm hesitant to levy indefinite protection of any sort. Let's see what a year of pending changes will do. Nyttend (talk) 03:09, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you remove the vandalism and the undoing of vandalism from this article there would be very few edits left. I'd like to see editing on this page by registered editors only. Please. Did I do this right? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:36, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Nyttend (talk) 03:13, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Need a short-term break from IP vandalism --- editors cannot keep article in a good state. —hike395 (talk) 22:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 22:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:72Dino (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Webclient101talk 20:56, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 22:46, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism that continually disrupts article. Camyoung54 talk 20:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Maxim (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) for 2 weeks. tutterMouse (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

11 February 2013

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Mcewan (talk) 19:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:30, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – short semi (24-72 hours) preferred to rangeblock... lots of unhelpful edits from the former yugoslavia. Sailsbystars (talk) 19:10, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. I have had to restore sourced information in this article on 11 February 2013‎, 5 February 2013,‎ 12 January 2013, 9 January 2013‎, etc. do to IP editors. Spshu (talk) 17:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 19:26, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semiprotection: IP-hopping edit warrior removing information based on personal beliefs and spuriously citing policies that don't apply. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:03, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 13:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vios of WP:FILMPLOT. Recurring issue that's flared up in the last hour or so. Tenebrae (talk) 00:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 13:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: - Edit conflict between users, possible case of vandalism.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:46, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Lectonar (talk) 13:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Vandalism and removal of information without any reason or edit summary. --Ahmed 313-326 (talk) 17:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Warn the IP user, and report at AIV if problems persist. Lectonar (talk) 13:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article has been vandalized since the news of the crocodile's death. Requesting protection for a few days until the attention goes down. GrayFullbuster (talk) 14:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Ekabhishektalk 15:10, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP socks of Deonis 2012. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:24, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:22, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

permanent semi-protection consistent, ongoing risk of IP vandalism, typically spam/promotional. This has been an ongoing problem with both Contract research organization and List of contract research organizations which was recently merged with it. the frequency tends to ebb and flow but there is a pretty high baseline rate of these additions, usually ip editors doing drive-by additions of an organization or company. -- UseTheCommandLine (talk) 11:31, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 13:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism from changing IPs. Please also have a look at Petrojet FC. Avoided (talk) 07:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Both articles. Materialscientist (talk) 09:02, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: A registered user keeps removing material referenced by reliable sources, saying the content is in dispute but without saying what is actually in dispute or why, just reverting it. Template:Main Southern railway line, New South Wales included inline in this article also part of this request. Dbromage [Talk] 06:53, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – It's newly released Film,facing disruption sometimes and chances will be more in coming days.I think its need at least 1 week semi-protection. ---zeeyanketu talk to me 04:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 07:40, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:43, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 4 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TemporarySemi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. SeaphotoTalk 03:10, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 03:13, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism. Paris1127 (talk) 02:36, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 03:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary to indefinite semi-protection: IP address involved in adding POV unsource and potentially inflammatory material about the alleged perpetrator of the Southern California shootings.  RasputinAXP  02:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Although I am somewhat loath to do so; in recent events, many IP's add good matériel. If another admin feels like unprotecting, just go ahead. Lectonar (talk) 13:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – At least 3/4 of the last 50 edits have been vandalism or suspicious/unnecessary/inaccurate revisions from non-verified IPs. Chris W. (talk) 00:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:59, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recently persistent vandalism from anons. HereFord 23:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 23:43, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: A registered user consistently keeps removing sourced genres, sources and keeps genre warring. I give him warnings but he just keeps removing them and ignoring it. Full-protection for at least a month.

2601:A:4100:5A:642E:1EB6:B88:2B18 (talk) 23:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined That wouldn't help anything: protection is for when multiple people are causing problems on one page. When one user is causing problems on multiple pages, we block as a last resort instead of protecting. I've blocked the user for 48 hours; if he persist after the block, let me know and I'll levy a longer block. Nyttend (talk) 05:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: A registered user consistently keeps removing sourced genres, sources and keeps genre warring. I give him warnings but he just keeps removing them and ignoring it. Full-protection for at least a month.

2601:A:4100:5A:642E:1EB6:B88:2B18 (talk) 23:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined That wouldn't help anything: protection is for when multiple people are causing problems on one page. When one user is causing problems on multiple pages, we block as a last resort instead of protecting. I've blocked the user for 48 hours; if he persist after the block, let me know and I'll levy a longer block. Nyttend (talk) 05:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: A registered user consistently keeps removing sourced genres, sources and keeps genre warring. I give him warnings but he just keeps removing them and ignoring it. Full-protection for at least a month.

2601:A:4100:5A:642E:1EB6:B88:2B18 (talk) 23:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I see no genre warring on this redirect. Did you list the wrong page by accident? User's been blocked for other issues, so you probably don't need to reply here. Nyttend (talk) 05:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: A registered user consistently keeps removing sourced genres, sources and keeps genre warring. I give him warnings but he just keeps removing them and ignoring it. Full-protection for at least a month.

2601:A:4100:5A:642E:1EB6:B88:2B18 (talk) 23:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined That wouldn't help anything: protection is for when multiple people are causing problems on one page. When one user is causing problems on multiple pages, we block as a last resort instead of protecting. I've blocked the user for 48 hours; if he persist after the block, let me know and I'll levy a longer block. Nyttend (talk) 05:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: A registered user consistently keeps removing sourced genres, sources and keeps genre warring. I give him warnings but he just keeps removing them and ignoring it. Full-protection for at least a month.

2601:A:4100:5A:642E:1EB6:B88:2B18 (talk) 23:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined That wouldn't help anything: protection is for when multiple people are causing problems on one page. When one user is causing problems on multiple pages, we block as a last resort instead of protecting. I've blocked the user for 48 hours; if he persist after the block, let me know and I'll levy a longer block. Nyttend (talk) 05:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Inaccurate changes frequently made by people unfamiliar with the topic. Taram (talk) 19:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Mike V • Talk 00:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: - Alarmingly constant IP edits, contribution of unnecessary information, unsourced/unreferenced and less than constructive edits. No edits summaries provided, possible vandalism. This article has a history of semi-protection.--LBM | TALK TO ME 19:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 13:24, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Long-term semi-protection: Steady stream of daily vandalism from innumerable IPs. Constructive edits few and far between, can be handled by request. Rivertorch (talk) 19:16, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 13:22, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 16:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 00:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The article keeps getting vandalized! Please help!. GleekVampire | talk! 15:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined You're the only person to have edited it in nigh on a week. GedUK  12:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Another Balkan War is looming about the (in my opinion non-relevant) ethnicity of his father. Mostly IPs that call him Albanian, but Redzepi self-identifies as Macedonian (see first source in article). The Banner talk 14:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism from different IPs in the wake of recent media coverage. --xensyriaT 11:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 00:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and unsourced edits. DX927 (talk) 04:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent adding editing and reverting of unsourced "Gakuen Basara" voice actors to character list by IP. After ignoring previous blocking and warnings, he is back for more. AngusWOOF (talk) 20:36, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He is also adding the edits as Kyleoconnor0730. AngusWOOF (talk) 20:45, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:26, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and unsourced edits. Especially now with the Grammy Awards. Skrillex has large amounts of hate so the vandalism will not go away anytime soon. Every time the page is temporarily protected, the vandalism continues when the protection is removed.Mattjsrules (talk) 01:36, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

12 February 2013

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Long term history of vandalism, and to keep the article clean, since it relates to a god. Arctic Kangaroo 09:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'm not sure about indef on this, as the edit rate is quite high, but in lumps. It might be a bit unmanageable so I'd rather see how it goes for a month first. GedUK  13:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 08:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 12:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes level 2. Although there is no consensus for the use of PC level 2, I really feel it is necessary in this case. There is persistent vandalism from IPs on this page, including 82.0.45.48, who has returned to vandalise it after a block. Now, there is an edit war going on from 2 registered users, one of whom I know is autoconfirmed (the other I'm not sure). There is also history of vandalism from registered users. Arctic Kangaroo 08:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. At this stage it would be better to take action aginst the editors involved. I see both have been warned, if they continue then report them to WP:3RRN. I've semi protected it to stop the IPs. GedUK  13:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to the log page, this article has been continuously protected since September 2008. It could use some expansion, and maybe the edits from IPs won't all be vandalism. (I previously made a similar request, but accidentally linked the template of the same name instead of the article).--eh bien mon prince (talk) 06:52, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Please ask NawlinWiki, as she protected it. GedUK  13:21, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. – Richard BB 12:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Lectonar (talk) 12:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ABCD: Any Body Can Dance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary pending changes: IPs adding random persons in the cast, adding unsourced contents and spam links. Torreslfchero (talk) 11:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Ushau97 talk contribs 08:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Persistent sockpuppetry. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 06:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Semi-protection may work as well. Webclient101talk 06:44, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 10:38, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Resumption of tiresome fangirl-IP vandalism after expiration of 7th temporary semi-protection. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 01:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC) Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 01:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. That should do the trick. Lectonar (talk) 08:14, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism from different users. Astros4477 (Talk) 00:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Ekabhishektalk 03:36, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Recent vandalism from multiple IPs. PhantomTech (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected., also User(s) blocked., user 213.103.160.22 blocked by Joy. However, since that editor appears to have found at least one new IP to enjoy, I'll argue the protection is additionally warranted. --j⚛e deckertalk 22:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to the log page, this article has been continuously protected since September 2008. It could use some expansion, and maybe the edits from IPs won't all be vandalism. eh bien mon prince (talk) 22:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Neither the page you requested nor the template it redirects to (Template:Districts of East Timor) are protected. So, no need to unprotect. Lectonar (talk) 22:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You wouldn't mean East Timor? If so, this is very much still a contentious area/topic, and I would be loath to unprotect it. Lectonar (talk) 22:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I actually mean the article East Timor, sorry for the mistake. Anyway I don't see recent cases of edit warring in the history page. Actually there are few edits of any kind in the last 2-3 months.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 23:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Vandalism. TBrandley (what's up) 00:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by Bongwarrior. AlexiusHoratius 00:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: User request in own userspace. It's a Fox! (Talk to me?) 00:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. AlexiusHoratius 00:22, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Apparent slurs being added by IPs and one account holder. Martin451 (talk) 23:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. AlexiusHoratius 00:26, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: high level of IP vandalism (see [8]) in continually restoring info re minor child in violation of WP:BLP. Quis separabit? 20:38, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AlexiusHoratius 00:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lugia2453 (talk) 00:09, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – All edits in the past year are vandalism. GabrielF (talk) 17:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Apart from the reverts, last year had only about 25 edits; this is way under the threshold for semiprotection, and not even enough for pending changes protection. Lectonar (talk) 19:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: continued vandalism from multiple IPs on a major article. IgnorantArmies 15:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked., other user warned and no edits since warning. Lectonar (talk) 19:14, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protection: Highly visible page. Cmckain14 (talk) 22:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already done. This page has enjoyed full move protection (that is, moves are limited to admins) since May 2010. As such, I'm not sure I understand the request. --j⚛e deckertalk 22:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent spike in IP vandalism. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 21:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 22:40, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please protect for a month, many unhelpful IP vandalism edits and BLP issues. JMHamo (talk) 16:53, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 22:36, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See talk. - Nabla (talk) 21:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC) (on behalf of DocEven (talk · contribs))[reply]

Unprotected I have watchlisted; at need I'll pending changes protect. Lectonar (talk) 21:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

13 February 2013

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Arctic Kangaroo 14:42, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:40, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Edit warring between 2 users. Requesting protection until the two resolve the differences. GrayFullbuster (talk) 12:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 11:09, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:46, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism started again just 3 days after unprotection. (not very persistent though, just taking a precaution). Arctic Kangaroo 10:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:45, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Need temporary full protection of this article to encourage editors to discuss the ongoing content dispute. A discussion has been opened, but is being mostly ignored. ► Belchfire-TALK 05:11, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:49, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – This article has long been plagued by either fans of the subject or the subject herself editing the article to add unsourced claims or make changes that contradict sourced changes. . Qwyrxian (talk) 04:28, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 15:51, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Banned socking editor keeps using an IPs to reinsert their changes. Bidgee (talk) 03:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:52, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne General Post Office (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Banned socking editor keeps using an IPs to reinsert their changes. Bidgee (talk) 03:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:53, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Article subject is mentioned in current RNCM/Chethams sexual abuse scandal as he was Principal at RNCM when a controversial appointment was made. Already an IP editor has, perhaps accidentally, written something about that appointment which could have had us in court; it has been suppressed and I don't want to say more in public. Semi protection for a while might help avoid repetitions, which are not unlikely. DBaK (talk) 14:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 15:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Makecat 13:40, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) User(s) blocked.. Arctic Kangaroo 13:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please check the edit history. That vandal has used multiple IPs to blank the article. --Makecat 15:05, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good observation. I did WHOIS report on both IPs, both are from Zagreb, Croatia. Probably means that the vandalism will continue. Arctic Kangaroo 15:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 15:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: 23 transclusions. JFH (talk) 18:36, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did you ask protecting admin User:Anthony Appleyard? Best usually to ask the protecting admin first before requesting here.tutterMouse (talk) 19:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already unprotected. Protection has been downgraded to semi by the protecting admin. Lectonar (talk) 10:06, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Lectonar (talk) 10:29, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 13:31, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) I think semi protection is enough. --Makecat 13:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 13:46, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Users and IP addresses are commiting vandalism against this page in large numbers. Cmckain14 (talk) 23:28, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Lectonar (talk) 09:38, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article has already been protected three times and vandalism/non-constructive edits keep occurring. Astros4477 (Talk) 21:53, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Vandalism will never cease, but this is not very much, really. Lectonar (talk) 09:49, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Since December 2012, an anonymous editor with a roving IP keeps changing dates, for example, claiming that the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and the American liberation occurred in 1996-1997. I'd like to see permanent semi-protection but will accept three months. There's been no other activity on this page since 11 October 2012. Fantr (talk) 19:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Tentatively declined. This appears to be the work of a single user in a narrow IP range, has occurred at broad intervals and was caught relatively quickly every time. If the user persists, consider warning/reporting instead. Leaving this up as another admin may disagree. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:38, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I agree with the above; will watch and see if pending changes protection might be appropriate. Lectonar (talk) 09:50, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Gaisano Iloilo City Center Illoilo City Center Gaisano Center Iloilo Article deleted via AFD, multiple recreation attempts. . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Lectonar (talk) 13:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by 189.197.xxx.xxx IPs. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 00:49, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 09:52, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: There's an ongoing conflict of interest in the article, where Jmon323 (talk · contribs) attempts to add stuff that belongs to a travel guide, not to an encyclopedia. Jetstreamer Talk 22:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. And Jmon323 is also over 3RR now, so warn him appropriately, and if he persists, report at WP:3RRN. If there is only one problematic user, RFPP is usually not necessary (or better: not the tool of choice). Lectonar (talk) 23:11, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – we have a couple of new users who are continually adding that he's a radical liberal terrorist w/o reliable sourcing; I don't think they're autoconfirmed, so semi-protection should be enough. Go Phightins! 02:43, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Those accounts are indeed autoconfimed - the page was already semiprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:46, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This seems like a really controversial topic (for a good reason). Full protection for edit warring may be a good idea here, but I'll leave the call to the admins of course. Vacation9 03:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah...well, it seems right now us non-admins have it under control as now that he's confirmed dead, not much can happen other than vandalism that continually is calling him a terrorist. It's something to monitor, though. Go Phightins! 03:06, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, just found that out. BLP violations are no longer an issue, so should be fine. Vacation9 03:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected. Lectonar (talk) 08:24, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing vandalism of a BLP. An openly homosexual sports referee tends to attract the lowest common denominator. However he is still actively refereeing so some worthwhile updates by ips and others can occur. Most vandalism is obvious (recent examples in history) so there should be little effort in preventing its addition. AIRcorn (talk) 00:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. All vandalism in last 6 months has been work of a single user, who has been blocked. Feel free to request again if unconstructive edits recur. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:42, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ~ Soerfm (talk) 22:33, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:45, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Protect for one week Martin451 (talk) 22:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:44, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistant vandalism every minute from IP. Blocking request, think temporary protection suggestible just in case . Thєíríshwαrdєn - írísh αnd prσud 21:21, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, blocking seems to have done the trick. If vandalism recurs after block expires or user returns with different IP, please report—if recurs from multiple IPs/users, feel free to file another request for protection. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – IP editors changing team information for a pending deal, which has not been officially announced. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:34, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. Seems official to me. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Vacation9 20:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. My, that is a lot of recent vandalism. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:28, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection requested to deter recent rash of vandalism from multiple new editors. ElKevbo (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:26, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 18:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – It has been semi-protected several times for extended periods with last instance being for year and is getting hit with vandalism again. There has been no significant constructive editing by non-autoconfirmed editors. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 00:40, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 16 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:45, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Pinethicket (talk) 00:42, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:21, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, very few genuine contributions by IP editors.Medium-level,constant vandalism,including recent(and more tricky) attempt to link the topic to "drone attacks on American civilians" by a new editor. Rwenonah (talk) 20:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. No constructive IP edits in recent history. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, for a longer amount of time. Ongoing IP vandalism, unlikely to stop soon. The page was recently semi-ed, but the vandalism resumed as soon as the protection ended. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:54, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 23:06, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent restoration of material in violation of WP:OR despite clear local consensus against. Editor is hopping IPs. --EEMIV (talk) 19:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I second that motion! Andrew Wiggin (talk) 19:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Required for an extended period of time. Frequent target for new and IP users to add poorly sourced information or change verified information without adding sources and references or updating existing references. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 18:15, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. And not all IP edits are vandalism. Lectonar (talk) 18:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

14 February 2013

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent test edits and vandalism on this BLP. Harsh (talk) 14:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 1 week by Miniapolis (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) 16:20, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – The page is persistently vandalized. It is primarily related to the naming issue earlier. I'm requesting indefinite protection, but if an administrator thinks a temporary timeframe is better, perhaps until a month or so after the movie release, I'm fine with that.  Ryan Vesey 13:58, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 1 week by 28bytes (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 14:13, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - Most of the edits are from the unregistered IPs these past few days and weeks. Some of them gives the article a good edits but some are just vandalising or playing the article. The article needs protection in order to obey the proper list of highest-grossing films and their corresponding box-office. User:Alphonsewan | User talk:Alphonsewan 8:35, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Miniapolis 18:05, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. BaldBoris 11:20, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – large number of IP vandalism edits in last 14 days. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 07:28, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 11:30, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Movie slated to release tomorrow, getting lots of IP edits that add unsourced info, randomly remove info, etc. A few days should help. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:20, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 11:27, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Future vandalism concerns. Abp9106 (talk) 06:14, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We don't protect pre-emptively, when vandalism occurs you come right over but not now. tutterMouse (talk) 07:09, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 11:20, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 05:51, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 06:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: BLP policy violations. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 05:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 06:07, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent spike in nonconstructive edits by multiple new accounts. Command and Conquer Expert!speak to me...review me... 05:31, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 05:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Edit warring over undue weighty, improperly referenced stuff about land/boundary dispute. No response to request to discuss on talk page. Please revert to my last version and semi. Thanks. ukexpat (talk) 05:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would someone please review this request, the nonsense continues...--ukexpat (talk) 21:04, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone, Bueller...Bueller?--ukexpat (talk) 01:44, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Bueller here; while the edits aren't exactly improving the article, I don't feel they require protection. You may want to have a nice cup of tea.Miniapolis 02:45, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. - ʈucoxn\talk 04:47, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 06:03, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Needs immediate protection. ---zeeyanketutalk to me 04:16, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Miniapolis 00:22, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from various IPs over the past six weeks. pmj (talk) 03:59, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: TFA. Excessive vandalism (even for a TFA). Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!See terms and conditions. 03:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Miniapolis00:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP users continue to make the same edit: an edit supplying his record for the 2013 season, which does not begin for 6 more months. —Ute in DC (talk) 02:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. May be a misunderstanding about what constitutes a football season; please discuss on article talk page. Miniapolis 00:30, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporarily semiprotect: Continued POV edit-warring by IP-hopping user. –Roscelese (talk ⋅contribs) 01:02, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈01:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism; seems like the nth RPP in the past few months. Dan56 (talk) 00:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Seems to have died down somewhat. Lectonar (talk) 08:06, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Protection Persistent POV edits - A lot of the page seems to be edited to slander Ask.com. A lot of editors have cited articles that are questionable or opinion-based in their use of the page. Just reading the Talk page gives you an idea of the edits that people are trying to make. A lot of "Ask.com installed this on my computer within a Java installer so we need to mention in the article that the company is doing illegal things" 70.27.86.216 (talk) 00:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:38, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Dubious unsourced additions. STATic message me! 23:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Miniapolis02:32, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

temporary semi-protection - persistent IP spamming from what appears to be a range of addresses. Not sure whether range block or semi protection is the narrowest protection. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:11, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:53, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism. Saddhiyama (talk) 21:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for one week by Anthony Bradbury. Mike V • Talk 06:19, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – National struggle over ethnicity. WhiteWriterspeaks 21:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:46, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – National struggle over ethnicity. . WhiteWriterspeaks 21:55, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GedUK  12:49, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

semi protection Check the edit history and you'll see on the first page of results, its mostly vandalism or the reverting of vandalism by cluebot or various users. Dream Focus 21:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. While there are some vandalism edits, they are spaced over a wide range of time, and the only recent one was within the last month and isn't enough to merit protection. Mike V • Talk 06:22, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Webclient101talk 20:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: persistent vandalism. Toccata quarta (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 20:12, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I don't know why my request was denied. This article has already been protected three times and vandalism/non sense edits keep occurig. This obviously needs protecting. Astros4477 (Talk) 18:44, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. TBrandley (what's up) 04:44, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP(s) and new user(s) has been adding unsourced materials. Torreslfchero (talk) 18:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lady Lotus (talk) 17:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Respectfully, I must say that this individual who declined my request was incorrect. From the article on the team's page:"Bourn -- penciled in as the Indians' new leadoff man and center fielder-- is scheduled to undergo a physical with the team later this week to complete the deal, which includes a vesting option worth $12 million for 2017." If he fails said physical, the deal is off. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring.--Dravidianhero (talk) 16:12, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected. Feel free to request unprotection/semi-protection once the dispute has been resolved. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:29, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism after last protection lifted. Pinethicket (talk) 12:44, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Page is redirect to Mentholatum; no problems seen on either page. Miniapolis 02:22, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. This page seems to be a target of someone using University of Maine public computers; was warned on one IP address before switching to another; vandalizes by posting vulgar phrases on the article. 331dot (talk) 22:25, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I don't think the frequency of vandalism justifies semi-protection at this time. Miniapolis


Unprotection: Protected indefinitely since 2011 but very very little vandalism issue for this low-profile individual. Arbor to SJ (talk) 07:02, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Miniapolis 16:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Paladino is no longer as high-profile as he was in 2010 when he was a national political candidate. Arbor to SJ (talk) 19:25, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried contacting Joe Decker (the protecting admin), as mentioned above? Lectonar (talk) 20:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Unprotected & Pending-changes protected. This was permanently put on pending changes, and was semi-d when we stopped doing PC. Now that we're back to PC I've restored that. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:24, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't asked, but I have absolutely no objection. --j⚛e deckertalk 00:07, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection Page was protected even although there was no vandalism. This is preventing unregistered users from fixing errors right at the time of the year when there are more people looking at the article (and I guarantee you that the article is filled with small error and omissions!). Mother's Day is never protected in Mother's Day until/unless there is excessive vandalism, and as a result we get several additions and corrections every year. WP:PROTECT warns that protection is temporary and thatthis is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, this is excessive. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already unprotected.. Are you sure you requested the right article? It hasn't been protected in some time. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:09, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I misread one log entry. It was vandalized and now it's semi-protected. Thanks anyways. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection This one was vandalized, but that was weeks ago! Same as above request. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you asked the protecting admin, Drmies (talk · contribs), to consider unprotecting early? Mark Arsten (talk) 18:12, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I asked him now. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:49, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it was weeks ago: it hasn't been vandalized because it was protected. I saw persistent vandalism going back at least to the beginning of January. If Mark thinks unprotection is OK, then go for it. Drmies (talk) 01:41, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: No reason for protection remains. Original dispute has died down. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 06:25, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined The protection is in place to let people form a consensus on the articles talk-page. I looked, and I see no consensus having emerged. I think the dispute has died down because none of the edit warring parties is able to edit the article. Lectonar (talk) 10:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The reason the article was protected in the first place was the edit-warring over the link to the article Bloody Christmas (1963) as shown here. Immediately after it got protected. The IP has not discussed this since December 2012. There has been no interest on that issue since December 2012. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 14:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

15 February 2013

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism from multiple anonymous editors. TheSuave 16:01, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. Miniapolis 21:14, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

full-protection: - Edit dispute over article name. Protect until consensus has been reached at talk page.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:36, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Absurd. 87.232.1.48 (talk) 19:37, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The comment above from the IP is just another good reason to why it should be protected. No communcation just more slander.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No we've been discussing it on the talk page, and there's be no recent edits regarding the name. I just find it strange you feel the need to lock the article, seems very excessive. 87.232.1.48 (talk) 19:55, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is nothing that should be discussed here but at the talk page. --BabbaQ (talk) 19:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Move protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. In the meantime, please attempt to reach consensus on the title on the article's talk page. Miniapolis 21:08, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article is a constant target for anon. vandalism and nonsense, likely from teens being forced to read it in school; this problem has been ongoing for years. The Old JacobiteThe '45 14:33, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Disruption resumed after temporary protection expired. Miniapolis 21:01, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Peacemaker67 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent vandalism by IP socks of Oldhouse2012, including personal attacks and abuse. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:52, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Reaper Eternal (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (3 days) --Webclient101talk 20:35, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The article is getting changed number of times for various things like runtime, box office collection. It has become a maintenance hassle to keep reverting the changes. IP as well as the user do not read the bold comments in the articles before making any changes. Article has also become a delisted GA for the same reason. Please protect the article for all these issues indefinitely. - Vivvt • (Talk) 12:45, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The GA delisting predates the current problems; please discuss on article talk page. Miniapolis 19:00, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – I'm thinking our Ip editor is logging into a dormant SPA to bypass 3rr concerns. . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:11, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. With the apparent account usurpation, semi-protection won't help much. Miniapolis 18:50, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Several IP users are attempting to add spam links to a website, currently the users are IP hopping and successfully evading imposed blocks - a range block would probably take too long to calculate and impose. YuMaNuMa Contrib 09:42, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 10:04, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

16 February 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – as well as violations of BLP. Webclient101talk 19:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 00:34, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The page is a permanent cruft-magnet with people adding links that 99% of the time don't go anywhere. The odd editor comes back time-after-time with a different IP and adds the same link. Semi-protection, either permanent or relatively long term would stop this rot. . Biker Biker (talk) 10:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Miniapolis 22:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Intermittent but persistent IP vandalism - silly kids. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:50, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 10:59, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perm Semi - Repeated IP additions of links to non-existent articles or links to outside pages. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 04:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let's see if this settles things down. Miniapolis 22:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Can we change this to Semi protection, I'm the original filer and I thought I asked for that and if I didn't was a mistake. A SPI will be filed in a little bit. . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Miniapolis 15:53, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term anon vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:40, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. -- Dianna (talk) 16:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. GotR Talk 02:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. -- Dianna (talk) 16:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Long-time has bands been added to the list with unreliabe sources and I removed those unreliable content but it seems that people keep adding bands with unreliable sources (ONE OF THEM was wiki though) and it's been like that for a long time, protect just in case of any edit warring.

Ihy34 (talk) 01:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. No consensus that Allmusic is not a RS. Miniapolis 17:14, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated vandalism by multiple IPs and users with zero or few past edits. – 2001:db8:: (rfc | diff) 01:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. (IPs also seem to be making constructive edits.) Miniapolis 16:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – A template about the largest cities in Turkey should mention the population of the cities. Mr. Maurice keeps adding the population of provinces and seems to fail to see the difference. The Banner talk 00:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested help on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Turkey#Template:Largest cities in Turkey to get this dispute sorted out. The Banner talk 01:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Request withdrawn, request for help seems to work. The Banner talk 10:24, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Requesting immediate archiving... Miniapolis 16:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Protection based on false reporting by a user with own agenda/POV: the controversy has already been made by another scientist's claim, and it was in the news. We can't use our own POV to go into establishing whether the claim itself is valid or not. 46.167.245.138 (talk) 08:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. Miniapolis 16:08, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Protection based on false reporting by a user with own agenda/POV. The controversy has already been made by another scientist's claim, and it was in the news. We can't use our own POV to go into establishing whether the claim itself is valid or not. 46.167.245.138 (talk) 08:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. Miniapolis 16:07, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Protection based on false reporting by a user with own agenda/POV. The controversy has already been made by another scientist's claim, and it was in the news. User stubbornly engages in revert war on the Talk Page! We can't use our own POV to go into establishing whether the claim itself is valid or not. 46.167.245.138 (talk) 08:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. Miniapolis 16:02, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Protection based on false reporting by a user with own agenda/POV. The controversy has already been made by another scientist's claim, and it was in the news. We can't use our own POV to go into establishing whether the claim itself is valid or not. 46.167.245.138 (talk) 08:25, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. Miniapolis 16:01, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Can we change this to Semi protection, I'm the original filer and I thought I asked for that and if I didn't was a mistake. A SPI will be filed in a little bit. . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Semi-protected for 2 weeks (see above). Miniapolis 15:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/MrBeefMan. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 04:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:03, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism by an IP hopper. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 00:57, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 01:01, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term anon vandalism. Perhaps PC protections would work too. -- LuK3 (Talk) 18:38, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Many non-disruptive IP edits. Miniapolis 22:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A significant amount of IP vandalism has occurred on this page during the current month. Although a few IP editors have done a reasonably good job trying to stem the vandalism, it is indeed persistent and a temporary protection should calm things down. . dci | TALK 00:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 00:49, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – Ongoing discussions on title. Should be protected until a move discussion is completed and consensus reached. Sailsbystars (talk) 22:26, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Miniapolis 00:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection or semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 22:05, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Miniapolis 00:08, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: In the news, BLP violations.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 21:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Semi-protection more suitable for frequently-edited articles like this. Miniapolis 23:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Seems to be a target for vandalism almost on a daily basis. Widr (talk) 20:08, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Indefinite semi-protection probably better for an article this frequently edited. Miniapolis 23:09, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Regular vandalism and BLP violations. John of Reading (talk) 17:33, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. If disruption resumes, we'll consider indeffing it. Miniapolis 22:27, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP jumping user regularly makes up statistics for the 2013 college football season, which does not begin until August. —Ute in DC (talk) 20:32, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Miniapolis 21:47, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: – Given this, seems to be a nice proactive action to prevent embarrassment from IP vandals. CutOffTies (talk) 17:29, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Since there has been some disruption already, this probably isn't jumping the gun. Miniapolis 22:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism. TheSuave 16:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Vandalism by IP and confirmed account; users warned. Miniapolis 21:19, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

18 February 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. – Richard BB 21:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Three CSDs so far. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 20:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Mark Arsten (talk) 20:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism in quick succession. Paris1127 (talk) 16:27, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Secret account 20:47, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Protected because of vandalism in 2008. Crazynas t 11:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection: edit warring between two or three editors. Frietjes (talk) 15:52, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:52, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 11:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 11:14, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 10:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 10:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 20:00, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP/Sock puppet vandalism. Cossde (talk) 13:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected by Mark Arsten as above. tutterMouse (talk) 19:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Based on my observations, pages on Malaysian football can never have no vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 14:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Low traffic BLP. Crazynas t 11:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:49, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Heavy, persistent vandalism since article creation in August 2012 from new and IP users. Webluethrough (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:47, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent additions of unsourced (except by YouTube links), unencyclopedic fan cruft. I can't revert anymore. Reporting for edit-warring won't help because of IP-hopping.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:50, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Article (one of several on Sri Lanka schools) has been the subject of long term IP edit warring, often accompanied by personal attacks on User:Cossde. The IPs may even be right about the content, but refuse to engage in dialogue and just edit war and attack instead. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 16:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – There have now been three instances of socks appearing on this page, and another one likely. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:44, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Low traffic BLP. Crazynas t 11:22, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – repeated vandalism from IPs in atlanta, georgia, one of them seems to be a dynamic one - 128.61.22.148 has already been blocked, now 128.61.22.147 is doing the same sort of thing. either this or a rangeblock probably in order. Jonathanfu (talk) 04:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:34, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. STATic message me! 16:55, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:22, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 14:54, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if problems continue and I'll reprotect it for longer. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 14:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations. —Ryulong (琉竜) 14:05, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by IPs 32.60.67.185 and 64.66.16.87 - sockpuppetry by User:Aoclery. hmssolent\Let's convene My patrols 13:24, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Kim Dent-Brown (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) --Webclient101talk 16:08, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Might be easier to block the user who keeps creating it? Something needs to happen anyway. -- Patchy1 REF THIS BLP 05:50, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 07:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Dan56 (talk) 05:50, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 07:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This page has been a vandal magnet since the release of the Ip Man-related movies over the past few years. Of late, it has been the target of several IP vandals. In my opinion, indefinite semi-protection is the best option, but temporary semi-protection should be sufficient, at least for now. LDS contact me 05:27, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 07:22, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Cindy(talk to me) 05:16, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected for a period of 18 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 07:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Not entirely sure what's going on, but 39 edits within 1 hour with a great deal of nonsense and highly dubious changes makes this seem helpful. Jonathanfu (talk) 03:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 03:32, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. TBrandley (what's up) 17:50, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Constantly changing of "List of Combined Reigns" from actual wrestlers to fake names. TySoltaur (talk) 16:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:08, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection - maybe for a week or two for now - to fend off an IP-hopper who insists on turning the article into a personal forum. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:27.252.21.212 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, or reblock with talk page access revoked. Makecat 14:19, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, BLP violations. 99.136.254.88 (talk) 13:46, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Ruslik_Zero 18:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Excessive IP vandalism, surprised this hasn't been requested earlier. —MelbourneStar☆talk 12:45, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 12:49, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

19 February 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-hopping fanboy repeatedly adding unsubstantiated "She is considered one of the best violin players all over the world" despite repeated warnings. TJRC (talk) 17:44, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 20:00, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes:Currently indefinitely semi'ed, sparsely edited BLP.Crazynas t 22:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes:Currently indefinitely semi'ed, sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 22:25, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Switched from Semi-protected to Pending Changes. -- Dianna (talk) 00:20, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Very low traffic page. Crazynas t 11:23, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The vandalism still frequent due to Borat. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:28, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – This article is about the national anthem of Kazakhstan. Lifting the semi could create too much risk for any possible benefit. Any damage by anons might go unnoticed for a period of time and could make people upset. EdJohnston (talk) 03:08, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Widr (talk) 18:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if it need reprotection for longer when this expires. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 15:50, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:17, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Long semi. Long-term problem with IP spamming of web design companies. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if it needs more protection upon expiry. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – SPA/IP edit warring with incorrect info. Bidgee (talk) 13:55, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if it needs more protection upon expiry. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC also would be okay. Ushau97 talk contribs 11:22, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if it needs more protection upon expiry. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:21, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I request a long term semi protection for the article as the article is consistently being vandalised by the IP. Thank you.Prashant  ✉  17:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 18:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – Although this article is under semi-protection, it is constantly getting vandalized and declining the edits is becoming a tiresome process, and some edits are slipping through the cracks. Even there have been several anon edits, almost all of them have been vandalism in some way shape or form. A quick look at the article history will reveal that almost all additions are reverted because they are not constructive. I am requesting that protection be moved up from semi to full, for a small amount of time. Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:59, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removed pending changes, now Semi-protected Mark Arsten (talk) 18:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism by Stubes99 and his/her sock puppets. Welcome to HorrorLand, where nightmares come to life! (talk) 16:59, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP and socks mostly. Temp prot should do it. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 15:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 18:01, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected 2 weeks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:15, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Vacation9 17:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary full protection: Some users keeps redirecting the page to other article without any discussion at the talk page. Jetstreamer Talk 17:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. & Semi-protected for two weeks due to socking. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Gurjinder Romana 14:58, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected indefinitely. --regentspark (comment) 15:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Article is the long term target of single edit (most often IP) editors who object to the inclusion of the word Basque in reference to Elcano's ethnicity. The fact is referenced and ought to be non-controversial. This page has had time limited protection before but I'm requesting indefinite protection because this is really wasting a lot of time that could be spent better elsewhere. Akerbeltz (talk) 16:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for one week. I found no record of previous protection on this page so we will start with one week. Please re-report if the activity resumes when the protection wears off. --Dianna (talk) 23:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Diannaa, I appreciate the protection but it's not going to make much difference. This article was created in March 2003 and the first time this flared up was in 2005 [9] and started to get really bad from 2006 onwards if you look at the page history. At a casual glance I'm counting more than a dozen edit wars since then around the use of the word "Basque". Protecting for a week really won't make much difference in the face of such prolonged toing and throing. Akerbeltz (talk) 01:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected I was bold and superimposed an infinite pending changes protection.Dianna, if you are unhappy with that, just revert, ok? Lectonar (talk) 08:58, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP/Sock puppet vandalism. Cossde (talk) 13:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for one week. -- Dianna (talk) 23:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Excessive IP vandalism attempts over the past few weeks, in particular the last 24 hours. —MelbourneStar☆talk 12:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 12:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Pictures of lynchings with the caption "what should happen to Lena Taylor." Name Omitted (talk) 05:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I have watchlisted too. Lectonar (talk) 09:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent vandalism.please check the talk page. Davidjohn13 (talk) 04:08, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:34, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. BigDwiki (talk) 03:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined There are contructive edits by IPs, and there really is not that much vandalism to the page. Lectonar (talk) 09:33, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 10:46, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent (and clearly malicious) addition by multiple IPs of unsourced pov content. Overview at talk page User talk:187.56.37.112 DVdm (talk) 08:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Lectonar (talk) 09:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Repeated and frequent vandalism for an extended period of time. (talk) Daniel the Monk (talk) 03:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Was protected because of socking in 2009. Crazynas t 10:50, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – See WP:Long term abuse/Ararat arev and WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Frost778. Frost778 could be the same guy and has been active as recently as the fall of 2012. It is surely not vital to leave esoteric historical articles open to anon editing when they are of interest to nationalist IP socks. EdJohnston (talk) 03:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Page protected in 2008 for "anon edit warring". Crazynas t 11:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – This topic is related to Hindu nationalism. That area of conflict is still active. EdJohnston (talk) 03:12, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Or PC, very low traffic page. Protecting reason: "hotspot for anon nationalist trolls of various creeds " might suggest PC is appropriate. Crazynas t 11:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – The history of Armenia is disputed due to the WP:ARBAA2 controversy. No peace and quiet there. EdJohnston (talk) 03:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Or PC, low traffic page. Crazynas t 10:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – See the FAQ on the article talk page for the controversy. A related article, The Sea of Japan naming dispute, is under indefinite semi. EdJohnston (talk) 03:22, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

semi-protection: Vandalism. Vegas30 (talk) 02:15, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I have removed one edit from the history. -- Dianna (talk) 02:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Persistent arguments over what should be included in the article. Forcaster (talk) 00:51, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It was full-protected for 24 hours by another admin, and there's been no further edits to the page since then. -- Dianna (talk) 02:23, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes: or unprotect, low traffic page. Crazynas t 22:25, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 10:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done recent activity confirms that semi is still necessary. Secret account 00:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 10:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Semi-protection was added per OTRS ticket, so I do not think we should make any changes. -- Dianna (talk) 01:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Multiple editors edit warring over country icons. Jnorton7558 (talk) 22:58, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - Edit war has cooled down. One user was issued an edit warring notice and told to have a look at the MoS. Please re-report here or at the edit warring board if the problem resumes. -- Dianna (talk) 01:10, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: There is no longer a need for this page to be fully protected. -- Cheers, Riley 04:46, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Materialscientist (talk) 04:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Repeated removal of images ([10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30]) over the course of 17 months by a doggedly persistent editor, often with gibberish as an edit summary. Removal has involved several editors as sockpuppets ([31]). Because of long history of vandalism, requesting indefinite protection (after restoration of the image) and a block of all vandalizing editors: 69.47.229.136, 173.161.92.140, Wrongski, Jackidaniels, Securiski, 65.79.32.147. -- Mesconsing (talk) 03:21, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected – One year for apparent sock editing. IPs and throwaway accounts have been making incomprehensible copyright claims. Wrongski, Jackidaniels and Securiski have all been indef blocked by a checkuser. EdJohnston (talk) 03:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs have vandalized the page with fake awards and one of said awards attacks a possibly living person. ZappaOMati 05:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – vandalized numerous times in the past month . Aunva6 (talk) 20:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Repeated changes by IP editors, resulting in a version that is manifestly a BLP violation (identifying a living person as a "Filipino journalist" when in fact he has not lived there since a child and has certainly never been a journalist there). This is a sensitive issue that needs to be addressed by editors who understand BLP policy and can work out the right way forward via discussion; the history of IP edits on this article show that editing needs to be restricted here. . Nomoskedasticity (talk) 19:38, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined The page has never been protected before, and there's an active RFC on the talk page regarding this very issue. There's been no edits of this type since the start of the RFC. Please re-report if the activity resumes. -- Dianna (talk) 23:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes or block. An SPA, User:MalibuSurfKing, has appeared sporadically since September 2012 to prod this BLP or to remove key details from it. Dempsey is a journalist who wrote a book about the murder of Meredith Kercher. As a result, she came under attack on the Web from anonymous people who disagreed with her conclusions. The attacks have been sustained, sexist and very undermining. Within that context, it's a concern that one account keeps appearing to claim she isn't notable enough for an article. I'd therefore like to ask that an admin consider either applying pending changes so that MalibuSurfKing is unable to make further changes, or to block the account as an SPA causing BLP problems. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 01:45, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Pending changes won't stop MalibuSurfKing, as they're autoconfirmed. They have not edited the article since Crisco opened the AFD, so a block is not warranted at this time. Hopefully the discussion at AFD will resolve the issue. -- Dianna (talk) 23:59, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. I have looked back in the history as far as november and the page is recieving persistent vandalism many times a month. I can't work out how far back it has to be reverted to. But there are "endemic and endless vandalism problems" too much for me to pick out. Please lock the page so that no further vandalism is done. And ask an admin to find a suitable older version to revert the page to. Main points to notice are buddhism is currently written as 1.9 billion, which it should not be. And past vandalism is continually putting christianity as 3.6 billion and islam as 2.1 billion which they also are not, although they have currently been corrected in the first table. In the "Adherents.com estimates" section, it still shows christianity at 3.6 billion and islam at 2.1 billion. So these need to be corrected. Also the first table is called "four largest religions". But it lists five religions which doesn't add up. These and other things are continually being edited and reverted over the past few months. It seems a battle between several people. So correction and locking is necessary in my view. 2.97.34.125 (talk) 18:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I understand your concern. But what has to happen here is for an interested editor to correct the facts to agree with the quoted source and then monitor to ensure the info stays accurate and up-to-date. Page protection does not need to be in place for that to happen. -- Dianna (talk) 23:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: 'Repeated addition of inappropriate material' given as reason in 2010, seems unnecessary/irrelevant especially given Mr Pallas is a low profile politician well outside of an election period on a low traffic page. Glrm88 t 11:08, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected – EdJohnston (talk) 03:01, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Protected because it was edited by a banned user in 2008. Crazynas t 11:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Very low traffic page, protected for socking in 2008. Crazynas t 10:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected – EdJohnston (talk) 03:46, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Incessant insertion of words "never give up"; one IP user has noted that this is vandalism derived from tumblr. IP after IP after IP has vandalized the page since the beginning of the month, with little cessation. dci | TALK 02:08, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Two weeks to start. Please re-apply if the activity resumes when the protection wears off. -- Dianna (talk) 02:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Vacation9 02:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected One month to start. We should make them re-name this county. :/ -- Dianna (talk) 02:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits in the past two months have pretty much only been vandalism and reverts. Jsayre64 (talk) 01:05, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for two weeks. Please re-apply for longer protection if the activity resumes when the protection wears off. Thanks -- Dianna (talk) 02:26, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Protected because it was being edited by a banned user in 2008. Crazynas t 11:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Vacation9 00:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 1 month by Rjd0060 Vacation9 01:45, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – new user persistently deleting huge parts of the article. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move-protection and Temporary full-protection - Until after verdict in case/and survey on talk page. Again users changing article name and info inside article on this controversial subject.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. I only just unprotected it, and nothing bad has happened since. See my talk, BabbaQ. Bishonen | talk 21:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Declined – (Procedural decline) So that the bot may archive this request. --Webclient101talk 21:52, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Low traffic page, protected in 2008 for reasons that no longer appear relevant. Crazynas t 11:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Low traffic page, protected in 2008 for reasons that no longer appear relevant. Crazynas t 11:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Low traffic page, protected in 2008 for reasons that no longer appear relevant. Crazynas t 11:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:58, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Rjd0060 (talk) 01:33, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 10:52, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done The history of BLP violations with this article goes back many years, keep at semi. Secret account 21:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism and removal of content. Jetstreamer Talk 01:08, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe pending changes is a suitable choice for this page, so everyone can edit it.--Jetstreamer Talk 21:10, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP.Crazynas t 10:32, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Switched from Semi-protection to Pending Changes. -- Dianna (talk) 01:16, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continued vandalism by IPs over gun law. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 04:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:45, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for one month per Qwyrxian. -- Dianna (talk) 01:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: following the removal of protection a few days ago and the resumption of IP vandalism. Span (talk) 01:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a month by Qwerxian -- Dianna (talk) 01:12, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 14:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. . Crazynas t 10:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to Pending-changes protected Secret account 00:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 22:44, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes:Currently indefinitely semi'ed, sparsely edited BLP.Crazynas t 22:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Persistent vandalism by anonymous dynamic IP editors to this BLP article. One of the IP ranges, the one beginning with the 90s appears to be the same vandal who was vandalizing the Mauricio Rua article until it was semi-protected. BearMan998 (talk) 00:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for two more weeks. Please cmon back if the activity resumes when the protection wears off. -- Dianna (talk)

Semi-protection: Persistent unsourced additions (gross numbers) and vandalism by IP's.-- Dravidian  Hero  12:05, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Previous protection didn't work Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Secret account 00:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes:Currently indefinitely semi'ed, sparsely edited BLP.Crazynas t 22:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Switched from Semi-protected to Pending Changes. -- Dianna (talk) 00:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes:Currently indefinitely semi'ed, sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 22:25, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Switched from Semi-protected to Pending Changes. -- Dianna (talk) 00:24, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes:Currently indefinitely semi'ed, sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 22:25, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Switched from Semi-protected to Pending Changes. -- Dianna (talk) 00:21, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Very low traffic page. Crazynas t 11:11, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected lets see what happens, not a low traffic page but been protected for way too long. Secret account 00:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Not edited since June 2012. Crazynas t 10:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected low traffic page. Secret account 00:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The IP vandals are back yet again; they immediately returned as soon as the previous period of protection expired. Can this be semi-protected for a longer duration this time, maybe six months? Thanks. – Michaelmas1957 (talk) 21:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 23:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: No verified content – Will be a hot issue during following month. --Mario Soto (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What a mess the history, edit warring, unsourced content, all types of speculations, unreliable sources, conflicting information and so forth. Pending-changes protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. which the conclave should be done by then. Secret account 00:13, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also warned Mario Soto (talk · contribs) for edit warring in the article. Thanks Secret account 00:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes: or just unprotect, page was indefinite semi'ed in 2008, one edit in 2013 so far. Crazynas t 22:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected I have removed the semi-protection and switched it to Pending Changes to start. If the persistent POV editor of 2008 does not return, we could do the full monty later on. -- Dianna (talk) 00:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending Changes: or just unprotect, page was indefinite semi'ed in 2008 (presumably because of the election) has one edit in the last 3 months. Crazynas t 22:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected I have removed the semiprotection and switched it to indef pending changes. Let's see how this works out. -- Dianna (talk) 00:13, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Statements in total disregard of administrative warnings [[32]] protection seems to be in order to avoid having to hand out blocks to anyone. The article in question is under dispute resolution but statements that an editor will continue edit warring to force people to the table seem to be immature at best and supremely disruptive at worse. . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 12:17, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for ten days to give dispute resolution a chance to work. -- Dianna (talk) 00:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP/Sock puppet vandalism. Cossde (talk) 13:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for one week. -- Dianna (talk) 23:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 10:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Pending-changes protected Secret account 22:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently indef semi'ed Sparsely edited BLP. Crazynas t 10:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Pending-changes protected. Also in my topic area so I watchlisted the article. Thanks Secret account 22:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Or PC, page is slow, been protected since 2009. Crazynas t 10:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Miniapolis 22:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

20 February 2013

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – All 20 edits by IPs in the last 5 weeks have been reverted. 18 of them were outright junk and 2 were unnecessary. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:54, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:10, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Increase in volume of IP vandalism over regular level. Probably due to upcoming Sony press conference. X201 (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:12, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some funny guy(s?) always changes the name of the president, which is János Áder, to the American hedge fund manager Todd Combs... KœrteFa {ταλκ} 10:06, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:05, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editors kept reintroducing WP:OR & WP:UNSOURCED information into the aforementioned article page despite being told not to do so. Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 09:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. for one month by JamesBWatson (talk · contribs) Mark Arsten (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Soerfm (talk) 08:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Mark Arsten (talk) 18:02, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 11:25, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 5 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:32, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Article has been vandalized by User:Bertrand101's IPs and sockpuppets for the past month. -WayKurat (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:53, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP socking, plus edit warring. aprock (talk) 07:29, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Looks like semi-protection was removed by mistake a couple months ago. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:48, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. People who are not users consistently keep adding false information and information with no reference. 11:23, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: A proper draft has been created at WT:Articles for creation/2026 FIFA World Cup. The salting needs to be removed to allow the draft to be moved to mainspace under the correct title. Roger (talk) 11:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 11:24, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Vandalism by 91.65.182.137 & 217.92.187.52

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 07:04, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 20:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Only recreated once. Lectonar (talk) 07:01, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Three Four instances of IP adding large portions of unsourced text in as many three days, despite reverts. Suggested semi-protection of at least 1 month as this vandalism is likely related to a 12 February 2013 article on the vaccine published on conspiracy website vactruth.com. kashmiri 19:48, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined That is under the threshold for semiprotection; if it picks up, just relist. Lectonar (talk) 07:03, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 03:11, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Lots of reverted vandalism in the past few days. Aristophanes68 (talk) 02:19, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism by multiple IPs. BollyJeff | talk 01:00, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 01:11, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Every IP submission since this article was P.C. protected has been rejected, most of them as unhelpful rather than vandalistic. Still, it's consuming a fair amount of reviewing resources, without any visible payoff. I think semi'ing it for a week or two is worth a shot, to see if the unhelpful edits drop off at all afterward. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 23:20, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done I don't think there are enough edits per day to switch from pending changes to semi protection. Also, semi-protection would not be applied to an article because of the non-vandalistic edits that have occurred on the page. Mike V • Talk 03:10, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 20:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected--regentspark (comment) 21:11, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. GotR Talk 20:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. --regentspark (comment) 21:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by Meowy, Ankarakediler, and other sock puppets of Meowy. Welcome to HorrorLand, where nightmares come to life! (talk) 16:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

21 February 2013

Indefinite semi-protection: Highly visible template. Armbrust The Homunculus 14:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Mike V • Talk 19:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – repeated IP edits introducing WP:OR based on primary sources (especially, a liveleak.com video clip) . Nomoskedasticity (talk) 09:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – All IP edits since pending changes was implemented have been rejected, either as unsourced or as vandalism. There appears to be a few IPs that keep trying to add "Vav" to the "Other Names" section several times over the past 2 weeks without providing a source, all unsuccessful. I haven't been able to find a source for this other name. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 05:32, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:51, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obnoxious IP-hopper is continually adding Unreferenced and dubious content regarding updates to this game. Refuses to source their content, simply reinserts it. Request semi-protection to prevent false information from getting into the article. Doc talk 23:10, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:48, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection till end of month. Significant spike in vandalism recently, probably school IPs relating to Black History Month. No recent constructive edits. Rivertorch (talk) 17:32, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 18:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Torreslfchero (talk) 15:24, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 19:00, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism of article by numerous IP users over the past month. Areaseven (talk) 13:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 19:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. SFK2 (talk) 11:38, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:41, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 08:01, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected —Tom Morris (talk) 11:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – As the most notorious wrestling event of the year, this is always subject to vandalism. Request either indefinite protection or protection until the event is concluded (April 6 2014). . – Richard BB 22:03, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – just readding the protection after creating userpage again. Was previously protected . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 10:33, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 10:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requesting upgrade for pending changes to semiprotection. This article has a long history of vandalism and the only IP edits since pending changes was activated have been vandalism. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 05:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 15 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 10:41, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 05:03, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 5 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 10:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent disruption and removal of sourced content by IPs. TDL (talk) 03:35, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Articles like that needs to stay protected, IP disruption, socks, so forth. Secret account 03:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection: Console was just announced 30 minutes ago and people are just adding info without sources. Shadow (talk) 23:33, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Adding unsourced material, while discouraged, generally does not warrant full protection. I also don't see any edit warring occurring after a quick look at the page history, so I can't justify placing full protection on the article. Mike V • Talk 03:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-Protection - Recurrent IP edit warring. Page was previously protected for edit warring. The page has been unprotected and the same IP editing is occurring with the same reverting occurring and claim of "vandalism". The only way to prevent this is to stop IP editing. 21:19, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 03:57, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 02:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 03:08, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Nicholasiswhoa has twice created this list of episodes of what he admits to be his own YouTube channel, and it's been speedily deleted twice. There's no evidence of meeting WP:NWEB here. BDD (talk) 02:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected --j⚛e deckertalk 02:58, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – I've tried to facilitate a discussion but there are numerous IPs and a new editor warring over some content. Protecting will hopefully coax them to the talk page. - MrX 01:11, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 7 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. For seven days they shall rest. --j⚛e deckertalk 03:02, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Protection: or Semi-protection: Vandalism by User:GlobeNthink, IPs, and new users. Removal of referenced content (with independent sources) for no valid reason. Adding biased information, removing critical viewpoints. Thank you. Fullbucket (talk) 19:48, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This editor also requested that the other editor recently involved with this article be blocked. It seems to me that GlobeNthink is showing an inordinate amount of concern over this article and wants it kept in the editor's preferred state. I am concerned that this SPA may be involved with this movement and the request should be declined and an encouragement to enter discussion be offered instead. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, I was just thinking the same thing. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 22:51, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is pretty clear that GlobeNthink is involved with the movement. So are maybe another 8 million people. That's why I requested page protection. Why was it denied again? Fullbucket (talk) 09:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of IP vandalism, + promotional links, these last 2 days. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 23:43, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High visibility page, and Pending Changes is not working out. Vacation9 23:24, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Agree that PR isn't working very well here. Bishonen | talk 00:46, 21 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Hello. I see this article keep being abused by vandalism. I'ts big now, so why not let us protect it so no IP's can edit it. Then we can cut down the vandalism. Simeondahl (talk) 19:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Rjd0060 (talk) 19:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition by IP-hopping editor of unsourced information - some of which has made it obvious that this a disgruntled ex-employee. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, we should not give this idiot airtime. . Biker Biker (talk) 21:29, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 23:03, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Already has PC, and there is an endless flood of vandalism. Beeblebrox suggested upgrading to semi. recommend semi protect until the current US gun issue dies down a bit in the public eye. Gaijin42 (talk) 21:22, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. "Pending changes" is supposed to be for "infrequently-edited articles"; this isn't that, certainly not right now. Please revisit down the line. Bishonen | talk 21:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - facts and information are constantly replaced with fallacious and false info. Kapitaenk (talk) 21:20, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Vandalism by 91.65.182.137 & 217.92.187.52 & Kapitaenk, keeps on deleting links to http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/3196 Merged double request. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 22:56, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. for resolving the edit war. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 22:59, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Arctic Kangaroo 11:58, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:14, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

22 February 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Significant vandalism in the past day with reasonable suspicion that this TV personality who elicits strong reaction will be a future target. Reccomend 2 weeks of semi and possibly PC. Hasteur (talk) 20:58, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – BLP issues on recent reports of the subject's death. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I've requested protection less than a week ago, but it was denied. Many IP editors keep removing an entire section without explanations. Can you please reconsider the decision? Maybe pending changes is a good option here. Jetstreamer Talk 20:11, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Not frequent enough for me to be comfortable with semi, but PC might be a viable alternative so we'll give it a try. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:30, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent vandalism from different users. Astros4477 (Talk) 19:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – 2 IPs keep changing the names to what they think the names should be and removing the 2012 lists and adding the 2018 names despite being told not to due to the rules on Original Research. Jason Rees (talk) 19:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Hurricanehink.. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:26, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Editor keeps on using primary and other nonreliable sources to say Lionsgate is a major studio when there is only one major news source proclaiming Lionsgate as a major studio while other still indicate that it is a mini-major. I have pointed out that the investment website and Lionsgate's website are not appropiate sources but he has reversed as if it was vandalism. I have started a discussion on the talk page, but based on previous encounters, he will most likely ignore it with out a page protection. Spshu (talk) 17:42, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Semiprotect from vandals. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 15:36, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 16:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Semi protect from vandals. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 15:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 16:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent editing"'

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 16:35, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: IP-hopping suspected sockpuppet (a step ahead of the range blocks) has been cluttering my talk page daily for almost a week, playing WP:IDHT. Thanks. Miniapolis 14:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, it all appears to be the same user, who has been caught in a rangeblock. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:44, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – An IP6 anon continues to show page ownership. I will raise this issue at the Football project and request page protection to stop the content disputes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:43, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Kosovo Polje (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – persistent editing by banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:40, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent editing by banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 10:59, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:40, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent editing by banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 10:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:40, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Bosniaks of Serbia (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent editing by banned IP-hopping sockmaster Oldhouse2012. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 10:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. IPs appear to have been rangeblocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:39, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. AussieLegend (✉) 16:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected Mike V • Talk 16:39, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection Since the last semi-protection expired, the vandalism on the page has remained rife, with the history showing repetitive vandalism from certain IPs despite reversions explaining the issues. Last time, indefinite protection was declined in the hope that the vandalism would cease: sadly it has not. As before, I feel indefinite protection is necessary as a discography (or indeed any page) of a popular musician such as Kesha will attract a greater number of repeat vandals, meaning that it will simply resume when the page is unprotected. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 10:03, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:38, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent surge of persistent vandalism from several IPs.  — daranz [ t ] 08:13, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.Lectonar (talk) 08:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism over the period of several years. Occurs from multiple IP addresses. Powerpiper (talk) 06:26, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The amount of vandalism over the years is under the threshold which would require pending changes protection, and way under the one for semiprotection. Lectonar (talk) 08:56, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Semi-protection just long enough to stop the IP who seems to enjoy mildly vandalising it. Cheers, LindsayHello 04:02, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. Lindsay, those edits warranted immediate block of the IP, which I did. Next time, just post a report (IP number) at WP:AIV. Semiprotection would only be warranted in case of persistent attack by multiple IPs. Materialscientist (talk) 04:11, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – People keep adding red-linked names, or just outright vandalising the article. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour ♪ talk ♪ 03:24, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It appears the vandalism on the article was mostly from one user, who is now blocked. Aside from that, I don't think there is frequent enough vandalism to warrant protection. Mike V • Talk 03:42, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. A significant amount of IPs, including potential IP hoppers, are genre warring on this page, without bothering to introduce sources or explanations for their edits. This type of activity has increased in the past few days, all over whether or not the album constitutes as "hard rock". How egregiously petty. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 20:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 05:43, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection - persistent vandalism likely due to his feature in today's Google Doodle. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:21, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 05:37, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Editors unable to keep up with vandalism. —hike395 (talk) 05:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 05:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:GeForce 600 Series (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection. Completely legitimate and factual discussion is persistently being removed by 175.137.253.61 - the user apparently does not like the fact the GeForce 600 series does not support Direct3D 11.1 or DirectX 11.1 and wants to prohibit any discussion about this fact. 91.64.206.196 (talk) 23:06, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done One of the IPs that has been removing the content has been blocked. I have warned the other IP and will keep an eye to make sure that it does not resume. Also, I'm a bit hesitant in protecting a talk page of an article, especially when there has been some positive contributions by IPs. Mike V • Talk 00:01, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – SP ended on December 24; since then, all edits have been Vandalism or the reversion thereof. SMP0328. (talk) 02:56, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 03:37, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Anti-Moffat vandals, mostly IP editors, are back again; there's been a number of reverts of vandalism in the last four to six hours, with no sign of it ending. --Drmargi (talk) 02:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 03:33, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Why the fuck is Elephant protected and not African Elephant?? It just seems a bit racist... Thanks, WazzaAzzaw (talk) 22:59, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 23:10, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – This article has proved to be a tempting target for spam links, primarily inserted by IP users over quite a long period. Mcewan (talk) 17:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked.. Only one IP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:06, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: from recent IP vandalism. Span (talk) 16:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. 212.219.252.192/26 blocked for two weeks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:03, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary protection: Persistent edit warring. Freshh (talk) 15:06, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:59, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated restoration of sections tagged as hoaxes. Edits appear to be coming from proxies, so semi-prot is the best bet. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:02, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:58, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – IP adding unsourced contents. Torreslfchero (talk) 13:44, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, there is now an account invlved, which will shortly be autoconfirmed, so semi-protection would be useless. Suggest pursuing a block of the account if the edits are as problematic as you say. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:57, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Junebea1 (talk) 11:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:55, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: IP vandal returned since last block expired. Oleola (talk) 08:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Too much of experiments by the IP´s and school-kids. . Yopie (talk) 23:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 23:48, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection from persistent IP vandalism. Span (talk) 23:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 23:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: This article has both pending changes and semi. Pending changes is unnecessary, so please remove it. Thanks!. Cncmaster's slave (my master) 21:44, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 23:11, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

23 February 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – No reason for this prominent BLP to be open to edits by IPs who are causing blatant vandalism as of late. Till 11:07, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:24, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: This article keeps getting turned into useless pablum by careless editors who don't even bother to read the entire article. In its latest incarnation it had two full sections on high pressure sodium bulbs with completely different text, and separated high p0ressure sodium and metal halide from other kinds of bulbs with no explanation (previously there had been only one section on HPS bulbs, and one whole grouping of bulbs together rather than an unexplained separation into two kinds). I suspect some marijuana may be involved... Am hoping semi-protection will make some difference in stabilizing the article.OverseerDragon (talk) 08:22, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:22, 23 February 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 twice for 20 days and a month) Vandals are back again. Please make the page semi-protected so that no one can edit without responsibility. At least for a year or so. Esha Karim (talk) 06:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for three months. I will watch-list. -- Dianna (talk) 16:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent addition by IPs and new users of promotional link to patch that's been discussed for years on the talkpage. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 06:02, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Four edits in two days then nothing going back months. By all means come back if it persists. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: User persistently attempts to recreate a page that clearly meets G11 and A7 of the Speedy Deletion criteria. . YuMaNuMa Contrib 08:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Article was protected by Peridon YuMaNuMa Contrib 11:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection - persistent vandalism on high-traffic page beginning immediately after protection expiration. I recommend at least 6 months since this page is a constant vandalism target, and cutting down on article history clutter might help. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:34, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 4 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 11:27, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism and unsourced edits returning after expiration of previous protection. Vacation9 04:46, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP vandal returned since last block expired. Oleola (talk) 05:28, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 3 months by Materialscientist (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 08:55, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 02:53, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 03:20, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Unsourced changes to album sales. This has been happening for a really long time so I think it's time for an indefinite protection. 0z (talk) 22:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 03:10, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – There are many constructive IP edits, but there has been a good amount of persistent vandalism. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 21:18, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let's see how it goes after three months. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:42, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Please semi this until the AFD is complete; one IP and one new account insist on adding unsourced information and BLP-sensitive personal details to the article. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 21:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 23:24, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection (may need to be protected for months): Long-term, persistent vandalism or otherwise unconstructive edits by a lone IP. Flyer22 (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. 85.119.229.16/28 blocked for three days. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:26, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. You must have done a rangeblock since I don't see a block notice on the IP's talk page or a block in the IP's blocklog. Flyer22 (talk) 21:43, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it seems that your slash above indicates a rangeblock. Flyer22 (talk) 21:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

24 February 2013

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Maybe this is an early request, but looking at the article history, it has had some problems with vandalism in the past,. Chip123456 20:37, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 20:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism by multiple IPs. Greengreengreenred 20:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 20:43, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Article was protected in 2007 due to 'trolling'. Very very low traffic article (last edit was June 2012). I think we can open this one up again and see how it goes. Crazynas t 19:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected. Bishonen | talk 20:33, 24 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article has been getting heavily vandalized today. --SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 20:26, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – as well as violations of BLP. . Webclient101talk 19:55, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 20:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 19:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 20:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 19:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 20:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Flags are constantly being changed to incorrect ones. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 17:58, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP hopper keeps adding trivial original research to the page. Attempts at communication fruitless as he moves to another IP and never sees the same message. —Ryulong (琉竜) 17:48, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Ruslik_Zero 18:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term vandalism in anticipation of the awards tonight. -- LuK3 (Talk) 17:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:28, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – BLP that has been the target of persistent vandalism. Was semi-protected for six months previously, but there are some positive contributions from IPs. The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 16:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Ruslik_Zero 18:25, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations. Since PC expired for two days ago, vandalism from IPs has started again. Torreslfchero (talk) 14:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, probably Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/JarlaxleArtemis. May be worth semi-protecting The Electronic Intifada and Israeli Apartheid Week too as they were under attack earlier too. Sean.hoyland - talk 14:05, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by Keith D. Malinaccier (talk) 17:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 09:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Temp semi-protection due to unexplained content removal. Fbifriday (talk) 08:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, only one IP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:49, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Long and persistent history of IP use as clothes rack and hobby horse led over time to article becoming choked with extraneous, essay-like and unsourced material, often POV (see, e.g., 15 February 2013 entry); until revised 16 February 2013, nearly 15,000-byte article listed only two references, one bogus and the other carrying a WOT "Warning!" tag. Perhaps the controversial subject matter lends itself to such incursions. Article now extensively revised, deserving of semi-protection. - Babel41 (talk) 05:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:48, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Spidey104 02:51, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:47, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP hopper continues to submit unsourced end dates in spite of numerous requests to substantiate. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:25, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP hopper continues to submit unsourced end dates in spite of numerous requests to substantiate. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:24, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:45, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Currently being targeted by User:Nangparbat. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:52, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't let them protect this page! Protecting these pages, like Darkness Shines wants to do, is a tactic that is being used widely over many of the Bangladeshi-Pakistani-Indian pages so that the editors who do this can game the content for their own POV biases. What they do is to semi-protect a page, finding whatever excuse they can dig up. Then they go after editors who do not agree with them. It's much easier for them to game the system once they've protected a page. Sanction lists have been abused -- that's an established fact! Other are being accused of being sock puppets in order to get their accounts blocked so that minor content disputes from those editors will disappear. Editors are being ganged up and then goaded into making more than 1 revert so that they will be blocked, especially inexperienced editors. BLP is being abused to no end in order to game content. This has got to stop! We need to protest this tactic. Wikipedia policy is being abused in order for some editors to turn pages into their POV fiefdoms.Crtew (talk) 00:06, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nangparbat Darkness Shines (talk) 00:24, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I found recent vandalism to this page using Stiki. Upon looking at the history, it looks like there have been several IP editors vandalizing and making unconstructive additions. I recommend a temporary IP block. Andrew327 18:55, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, seems to have died down HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:33, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – request a week as this page as been edits by socks of banned sockmaster Oldhouse2012 a total of 15 times since 22 Feb. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:35, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – request a week as this page as been edits by socks of banned sockmaster Oldhouse2012 a total of 18 times since 20 Feb. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:33, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:43, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – No constructive edits from IPs since PC was activated. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 20:27, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Currently being hit by User:Nangparbat. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:49, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't let them protect this page! Protecting these pages, like Darkness Shines wants to do, is a tactic that is being used widely over many of the Bangladeshi-Pakistani-Indian pages so that the editors who do this can game the content for their own POV biases. What they do is to semi-protect a page, finding whatever excuse they can dig up. Then they go after editors who do not agree with them. It's much easier for them to game the system once they've protected a page. Sanction lists have been abused -- that's an established fact! Other are being accused of being sock puppets in order to get their accounts blocked so that minor content disputes from those editors will disappear. Editors are being ganged up and then goaded into making more than 1 revert so that they will be blocked, especially inexperienced editors. BLP is being abused to no end in order to game content. This has got to stop! We need to protest this tactic. Wikipedia policy is being abused in order for some editors to turn pages into their POV fiefdoms.Crtew (talk) 00:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nangparbat Darkness Shines (talk) 00:25, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The sock is back and using his mobile.[33] Darkness Shines (talk) 10:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Still at it[34] Please semi the page. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:57, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Long-running but slow changes to the article by fans of Amitabh Bachchan, i.e., adding him to starring cast in infobox, reordering the cast in the body so he's listed higher up, and occasionally adding such choice statements as "It will also star India's legendary actor Amitabh Bachchan in cameo" to the lead.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:49, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent edit warring and content dispute. 3RR violation. Jayakrishnan.ks100 (talk) 09:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: This page was semi'd 2 years ago by Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) for persistent vandalism. Dabomb87 left the project last year, so I can not request them to unprotect. Page improvements are being discussed at the village pump and I suspect the vandals have since moved on. So I'm requesting it be unprotected since it's an informational page that points to policies, rather than a policy page itself. Or perhaps it could be changed from semi to WP:PC1 if there's still a concern. Thanks for your help. 64.40.54.80 (talk) 17:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please lift the PC level 2 protection. It is not useful on a redirect. It is already semi-protected, and this can be escalated to full protection should the need arise. — This, that and the other (talk) 11:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done I've removed the PC2 and added full protection. This is necessary given that it is a major Josh24B target. Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – My IP troll is back. I am One of Many (talk) 10:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 10:23, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:I am One of Many (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – My troll is back. I am One of Many (talk) 10:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 10:23, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: from continuous IP vandalism. Now in progress. Span (talk) 23:00, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Amalthea. --Bongwarrior (talk) 10:25, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent spike in vandalism. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 18:54, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 00:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Persistent list-pushing by anons and newly-registered accounts despite being reverted. Blake Gripling (talk) 11:54, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 00:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – Last few days, lots of Webkinz related vandalism. Went unnoticed for a few days, I got it fixed, now a logged in account is continuing. Fbifriday (talk) 04:07, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:10, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Kind of Balkan War, with new editors and IPs claiming that Redzepi is of Albanian-Danish decent, while he self-identifies (see source in article) as being of Macedonian-Danish decent. The Banner talk 23:55, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: I believe that the protection is no longer necessary. I requested unprotection on my talk page, but it has not been done yet. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 01:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 01:33, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Vacation9 23:19, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 00:25, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Peacemaker67 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – banned sockmaster Oldhouse2012 vandalising my talk page (again). Thanks. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:20, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:26, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Also, I suspect sockpuppetry. Lugia2453 (talk) 21:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment)I've filled out an SPI report. I think at least one week of semi should be enough. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 22:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:33, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism and unsourced edits keep occurring. Article has already been protected several times. Astros4477 (Talk) 18:29, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by another admin. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 00:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: page in my own userspace. L1A1 FAL (talk) 16:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 00:27, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

25 February 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term IP disruption. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:39, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:04, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated vandalism from dynamic IPs -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:20, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by Drmies (talk · contribs). Please note I have redacted the diffs provided above. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:36, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Users continue to add Garuda Indonesia with no firm date and no sources provided as per WP:AIRPORTS. Snoozlepet (talk) 19:27, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. As set forth in the protection policy, semi is appropriate when a dispute/disruption is restricted to IPs and no autoconfirmed users are involved. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:12, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – various newly registered and IP users are consistently deleting referenced content without given any explanation.--Filmested (talk) 12:12, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Several productive edits from new/unregistered users as well. If this is a content issue, semi-protection is inappropriate. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:59, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism and edit tests from IPs and SPA on today's featured article. Widefox; talk 10:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

understand backlog, can we prioritise due to today's featured article, Widefox; talk 15:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 05:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. No "repeated recreation"—only created twice, and referring to different subjects. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:12, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 03:27, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection Annual vandalism. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Boy, someone really should have addressed this last night... while the heavy vandalism was actually happening. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article page is being persistently edited by anonymous IP editors inserting unsourced, speculative fan claims about the show Total Drama: All-Stars. Creativity-II (talk) 08:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Second request for semi-protection against editing by anonymous IP editors, who continue to insist on inserting fan speculation edits and unconfirmed information about the show per WP:CRYSTAL and despite an earlier IP edit block. A longer period of semi-protection than just one week may be needed this time around. Creativity-II (talk) 07:25, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Anons and new users daily trying to remove content relating to the status of this community compared to other communities, in defiance of the source and talk page. You'll have to ignore the contributions of 2.219.218.79 when reviewing the history - that is me, editing while I was convalescing away from home. Sitush (talk) 06:58, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ruslik_Zero 18:46, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Three users engaged into edit war. Eduemoni↑talk↓ 04:44, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I think the protection is not needed any longer as the editors stepped aside and I'm currently monitoring the article's talk page for moderation purposes. Eduemoni↑talk↓ 07:55, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for 10 days by RegentsPark (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 18:49, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: At least we will get something happening here. AIRcorn (talk) 11:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:02, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Widr (talk) 11:52, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:05, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. AIRcorn (talk) 11:51, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:08, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Someone has placed a Miscellany for Deletion tag on this page, though it clearly does not violate any policies and is constructive in my own userspace. Since I can't remove the MfD tag myself, I'd appreciate if someone could protect this page so that I don't have to worry about other users modifying my own userspace when there's nothing wrong with it. I'd also like if someone else could please kindly remove the MfD tag. Thanks!. Jackson Peebles (talk) 05:31, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done - no-one but you has ever edited that page. The MfD tag was placed on the general template (transcluded on your page), which is a separate matter discussed here. Materialscientist (talk) 05:40, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the explanation - I was very confused. Much appreciated! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 05:57, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Or unprotect, low traffic BLP. ~2 edits in six + months. Crazynas t 22:26, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Malinaccier (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – or unprotect. Page was protected in 2009 for BLP issues, very low traffic (1 edit in last 8 months). Crazynas t 21:53, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Just came off a two-month semiptotection and the abuse started right back up. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:121.74.158.215 reported by User:Guy Macon (Result: Blocked) Guy Macon (talk) 02:51, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rschen7754 07:09, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – Low traffic BLP (~5 edits so far this year) good candidate for PC. . Crazynas t 19:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Same as rationale in other request. Mike V • Talk 20:23, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: BLP policy violations – Currently Semi'd. Article has ~6 edits in the last year, low traffic BLP is a perfect PC candidate. Crazynas t 19:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected There have been very few edits, and the concerns about BLP were from 2007. I think it might be worth giving unprotection a shot. Should it resume, please post a request here. Mike V • Talk 20:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Very few constructive IP edits. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 05:49, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 05:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: Recent IP vandalism. (Rather - gross distortion of facts in both directions. This is a biography of a living politician who officially came second in recent presidential elections in Armenia, and is currently leading a popular grassroots movement against alleged falsifications by the incumbent's ruling clan.) ― Teak (talk) 22:01, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Please report the user(s) to AIV if the vandalism continues, or feel free to file another request for protection if the situation worsens. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:09, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Page blocked in 2009 due to disruption, shall we try opening it up?. Crazynas t 02:30, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Malinaccier (talk) 02:32, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 21:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection: - edit dispute about visual kei at article. Protect until consensus at talk page discussion I started.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:06, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I don't feel that there is a significant edit dispute to warrant protection. Should the warring continue, it may be better resolved in warnings and/or blocks to the involved parties. Mike V • Talk 20:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Or PC. Page is very low traffic (one edit since April 2011). Protected in 2009. Crazynas t 22:24, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:41, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated additions by various IPs claiming (often with a bogus source) that MSNBC's new marketing campaign invovles Bea Binene or "The Wizard of Viva Video Ass". Ignores all talk requests. Pops up on various articles with this one being a common target. SummerPhD (talk) 23:24, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: The Daytona 500 Race just finished, and there has been a flood of unsourced info, vandalism, and BLP violations as a result. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 22:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 23:36, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – There is currently a dispute about the company side of the club being including in the article i have advised users involved to take it to talk although they are they still persist in putting there POV into the article so even though the edit warring isn't great to try help achieve a consensus i request full protection such to force the users to discuss on talk until a consensus is achieved, . Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 12:21, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Please request unprotection when consensus has been reached. Malinaccier (talk) 23:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Page was protected because of vandalism in 2009. Page has not been edited since May 2011, maybe we should try this out opened up?. Crazynas t 21:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 23:23, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Protected in 2009 for a edit warring... this is so stale it might get someone sick. Crazynas t 21:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Agreed. Any edit war should have died from attrition by now. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 23:21, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

26 February 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Resumption of disruptive edits resulting in article being semi'd twice last year. Rivertorch (talk) 09:59, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It might be that longer term, pending changes will work better, but it's a bit too high traffice recently for that to be effective. GedUK  12:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Author keeps removing valid AfD tag - I have nominated it 3 times already. Can you protect it to stop him doing this again? Gbawden (talk) 07:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 09:01, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Very few constructive IP edits. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 09:45, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Editing patterns are a bit lumpy, so I'm not quite sure that PC won't be a bit of a burden when it gets hit, but we can see. GedUK  12:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Edit warring. Temporary protection didn't work. Edit warring has resumed disregarding attempts to reach consensus in the talkpage. JK (talk) 07:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Semi protection is innapproriate, as I can't see a consensus between registered users that IPs are distrupting. Full protect for three weeks should give everyone involved time to reach agreement. GedUK  12:43, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Due to the film _Argo_ winning the Oscar for best picture, rouge anonymous editors are adding deleting information randomly or with a specific POV to match the fiction film. . Abebenjoe (talk) 07:14, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:24, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. STATic message me! 04:00, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Malinaccier (talk) 04:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 01:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I think it's all calm now after the edit war on Feb. 6. But I will keep an sharp eye on the page just in case. StormContent (talk) 03:12, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with this evaluation. Malinaccier (talk) 04:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: rampant sock-puppetry and IPs trying to close the discussion early (Francesca Hogi could use use semi-protection). Frietjes (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checking to see if protection is necessary. Seems to have died down, will watch this for a while. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:51, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not done (For the archive bot) Mike V • Talk 01:36, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, has been occuring since 2010. 069952497aComments and complaintsStuff I've done 01:16, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Malinaccier (talk) 01:21, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. JayJayWhat did I do? 01:01, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by NawlinWiki. Malinaccier (talk) 01:13, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Very few constructive IP edits. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 00:18, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 16 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Malinaccier (talk) 00:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Remove Pending Changes and upgrade to semi. No constructive edits during the past 2 weeks on PC. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 00:09, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Malinaccier (talk) 00:53, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Been going on for some time now. JayJayWhat did I do? 00:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Malinaccier (talk)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Every edit for years done by editors who are not autoconfirmed has been either outright vandalism, or suspected vandalism. Nonprotection doesn't seem to serve the article well. . — Maile (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It looks like the past month has been really busy, but before that there was not much vandalism. We'll see what a month can do. Malinaccier (talk) 00:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Lots of IP vandalism. Not many constructive edits from anonymous editors. . Inka888 22:50, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:58, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: A load of different IPs keep reverting [35] [36] to this user's edit [37] right down to the misspelling of "hip hop", which is disputed by me and 2Flows (talk · contribs). They refuse to discuss and just edit war - if I were an uninvolved admin I would consider semi-protection. filelakeshoe (talk) 10:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Barek (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Webclient101talk 01:09, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: The dispute(s) have now been settled and full protection is no longer necessary. JayJayWhat did I do? 22:25, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Mike V • Talk 01:33, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Or PC, low traffic BLP protected for 'excessive violations', page has been edited once in the last three months. Crazynas t 02:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Malinaccier (talk) 01:15, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP's adding unsourced information. JayJayWhat did I do? 22:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:45, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Bunch of IP's vandalizing the page. JayJayWhat did I do? 22:32, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:45, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by anonymous user(s?). The article is about Goianá, the small town in Minas Gerais, not Goiânia the capital of Goiás - Bagunceiro (talk) 22:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected and added to my Watchlist. Strange that this doesn't seem to be happening at pt.wiki. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:49, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent major and minor vandalism by IPs over several months, as seen in the revision history — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProtoDrake (talk • contribs) 22:04, February 25, 2013‎ (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Someone is persistently changing club's arena capacity in article although there are clear references about it. Nightwolf87 (talk) 09:31, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Ruslik_Zero 18:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-Protection: Persistent widespread vandalism to the page, probably due to the high traffic received — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonie148 (talk • contribs) 17:11, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

27 February 2013

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Long term vandalism by IP's. Sarahj2107 (talk) 16:35, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected – quite heavy vandalism recently, a bit more than I'd like to see for pending changes. A 1-month trial of semi-protection should help. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Possible raiding; 4 different IP accounts in a space of 2 hours. Also, numerous cases of IP vandalism, especially in the first page of the page's history. RazorEye ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 08:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Seems to have died down. Feel free to file another request if another "rash" of vandalism occurs. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:56, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: I haven't had any harassment since the page was protected. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 17:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected --Bongwarrior (talk) 17:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection massive edit war by a lot of users.-- Dravidian  Hero  14:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected indefinitely. Please note I have reverted the page to a stable version (see WP:PREFER for rationale). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
much appreciated. Thank you.-- Dravidian  Hero  15:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection for 1 year - vandalism Pass a Method talk 13:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Vandalism has been relatively infrequent and there have been productive edits from IPs/non-autoconfirmed users recently. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Various newly registered users adding same contents which has been reverted over the past few days since they are not supported by any reliable sources. Torreslfchero (talk) 10:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - First, some of the users involved are autoconfirmed, so semi-protection would be inappropraite. Second, little attempt has been made to communicate with these users outside of edit summaries; try starting a discussion with them on the talk page. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 10:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi Protection:Government project with Factual data.

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. We only protect a page when there is significant vandalism or other disruptive activity from users; that is not the case here. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 10:42, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent dynamic IP vandalism on the article about the city. -OthanWiki2009 (T/C) 09:43, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 05:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 10:44, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 10:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Level of IP vandalism has become a nuisance. A few weeks' relief would be welcome. Hertz1888 (talk) 09:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for 1 week. There are some constructive IP edits here, but this should help quell the vandalism. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 10:31, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP user continues to restore redirect with non-notable series. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 06:36, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I don't think that there is significant enough disruption to protect the page. In addition, I believe that this situation would be better resolved via discussion of notability on the talk page. Mike V • Talk 06:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full Protection:Government project with Factual data.

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 06:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: There's no need for PC protection of a fully protected redirect. —cyberpower ChatOnline 03:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected by Mike V (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 09:26, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Requesting immediate archiving...

Pending Changes Protection: This is the current TFA, and has already been vandalized significantly by 2 IP users, one of whom removed half the content, which wasn't discovered until 15-20 minutes later. – Cdtew (talk) 05:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 05:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism http://en.wikichecker.com –Moxy (talk) 05:05, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - blocked one IP. Materialscientist (talk) 05:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism http://en.wikichecker.com –Moxy (talk) 05:05, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - there was a brief attack, but looks like stopped. Materialscientist (talk) 05:25, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A 7-10 day semi on this would be indicated as this is a breaking high-profile case in Mexico and details are still emerging. More edits requiring reverts likely from IPs coming in the next few days as details emerge. Also BLP considerations. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 04:24, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - the activity is yet too low, re-report if it truly escalates. Materialscientist (talk) 04:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection recent spate of vandalism by IP editors. -- [UseTheCommandLine ~/talk] #_ 04:11, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 04:54, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Created twice by the same user in the same day as an advertisement article. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 02:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Vacation9 02:46, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined The majority of the vandalism edits comes from a user that has been blocked. I think things will settle down now. Mike V • Talk 04:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent dynamic IP vandalism on the table of members which results in information not being presented in an accessible manner. The stable version list is meant to be a summary of the sub-article Members of JKT48. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 07:20, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Secret account 07:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism http://en.wikichecker.com –Moxy (talk) 05:05, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 05:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A history of vandalism by IP addresses. Since Jan 2013, it seems to have gotten worse. — Maile (talk) 01:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 4 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 05:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

so that I can:

Unprotected Pending changes removed. Mike V • Talk 04:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – 7 days please, persistent ip vandalism.   little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  04:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent full-protection; topic-banned editor is repeatedly changing the redirect back into a biased playground of copyright violations. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 23:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – the user was topic-banned and notified of said ban after his latest edit to the article. If he continues to edit the page, request a block for enforcement. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent insertion of dubious unsourced claims about forthcoming movie. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:59, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 04:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Incorrect transfer update; per the Internazionale official website, he is only on trial. Mattythewhite (talk) 23:56, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Change in budget and other numbers without providing references. Torreslfchero (talk) 21:08, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. by JamesBWatson (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:09, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – Controversy about the name. Don't want anyone moving the page without consensus. Paris1127 (talk) 20:10, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I don't see much history of move-warring. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 20:50, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by multiple IPs. Each were previously protected for three weeks.The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 22:19, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:45, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Widr (talk) 18:20, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked.. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:51, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-hopping vandal repeatedly vandalizing article; short term protection should dissuade him. The Old JacobiteThe '45 17:47, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – This is not blatantly vandalism, and I see no effort has been made to communicate with the editor. Try talking to him first; if he doesn't listen after that, he is being disruptive. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 19:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Second request. Another editor has ignored the attempt at discussion at the article's talk page and when ahead and reverse edit based on the fact Liongate isn't widely consider a major studio yet.Spshu (talk) 21:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:01, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by IPs and new users. Frietjes (talk) 21:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:00, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 21:15, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Rather low-level, let's try PC. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:03, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent vandalism by IP's semi should do the job here. Dcheagle • talk • contribs 21:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:07, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent Semi-protection: Due to a high risk of Sock Puppetry and Vandalism, and to promote compliance of Biography of Living Persons of Super Junior. Tibbydibby (talk) 15:58, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

28 February 2013

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Span (talk) 18:01, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Sarahj2107 (talk) 16:46, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 18:52, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: for IP edit warring past 3RR (continued after notification).Novangelis (talk) 15:50, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – We seem to have two or more users, at least one IP and one unconfirmed, making quite a few recent vandalizations to this page. I recommend short-term semi-protection in order to stop the back-and-forth vandalism. Jackson Peebles (talk) 15:30, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes protection Persistent vandalism.

Semi-protected Pending changes is only enabled for article space. Mike V • Talk 18:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High vandalism-to-constructive contribution rate the last month. Zaminamina Eh Eh Waka Waka Eh Eh 15:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 18:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Long burning edit-war has heated up in the last two days with some IPs, some sock-puppetting, and a lack of necessary discussion on the talk page. Thargor Orlando (talk) 13:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I would take a close look when deciding which version to protect. One (Thargor) has come from the last few months of talk, the one form CartoonDiablo is a big hand grenade / bundle that they keep tossing. Both sides have requested protection, I'm guessing that CD figures a 50/50 chance of getting their hand grenade locked is a good move. See article talk page. Also open at ani. North8000 (talk) 14:00, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also there is an IP (74....) 3/4 of who's life work has been to mimic CD at this article, and a SPA 100% of who's life work has been to edit war at this article. North8000 (talk) 16:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 16:29, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: High level back and forth reverting from registered and unregistered users. DJSasso (talk) 14:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Was just coming to request the same. Nationalistic edit warring from several parties here. Resolute 14:25, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: WP:DWG. He died almost 7 weeks ago. -- Trevj (talk) 14:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by Zscout370. Crazynas t 14:43, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I thought I'd checked the logs but that must've been for another page. I didn't see the padlock icon but it's obvious anyway. I'll take more care in future. Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 16:13, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Anons persistently remove AFD tag. —teb728 t c 12:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – This guy got the death sentence today, the article was already a target for both his fans and haters, I suspect it is about to get a great deal worse. IP edits are already breaking BLP policy and there has been blanking . Darkness Shines (talk) 10:37, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:39, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism. ~ satellizer ~~ talk ~ 10:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. GedUK  12:37, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Most of the recent edits are vandalous edits or their reversions, and the rest are erroneous edits or their reversions. This is especially true of IP edits. 99.160.254.69 (talk) 06:29, 28 February 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. With a new episode coming soon (yay!) this qill let us see how well it stands up as interests picks up. GedUK  12:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Protection: There is an ongoing edit war about whether a reference confirms the show's cancellation or not. An attempt to end the dispute through discussion has not worked. Since the edit war is between registered users it needs to be protection and not semi-protection. One week will hopefully be enough to settle this dispute through discussion. Spidey104 01:14, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It shouldn't be that hard to explain the difficulty in assessing the future of the show in the body of the article, and use the various sources. As the situation changes, so can the article. Also, cancelling this show would be a terrible shame! GedUK  12:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations – [38], [39], [40](this might need revdel), in general low traffic BLP with hardly any positive IP contributions in the last six months (except removing vandalism, once). Crazynas t 07:03, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 09:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent anon removal of CSD and AfD tags. reddogsix (talk) 04:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - warned the IP. Use WP:AIV for such cases, semiprotection is not appropriate against one IP/user. Materialscientist (talk) 04:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Mr. Rosenberg's staff and publicist persistently vandalize edits to make the article into free advertisement instead of reporting objective facts. Even when others cite sources, they persistently revert edits back to inaccurate, untrue and unverified propaganda. I think indefinite protection is necessary in this case.

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. KrakatoaKatie 05:52, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Level of IP vandalism seems to still be steady after the previous semi-protection ended on 2 February 2013. Might recommend permanent semi-protection due to the possible high level of notability of the topic. This isn't the first time I have personally ran across vandalism in decent amounts on this article; I recall fixing some vandalism during the middle of last year as well. Steel1943 (talk) 02:07, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. KrakatoaKatie 05:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User request within own userspace. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 07:05, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 07:08, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. §haun 9∞76 ༆ 03:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Materialscientist (talk) 03:11, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: The subject of this article has been arrested for embezzlement. She was already a controversial figure, the attention from the arrest has caused a rapid increase in vandalism, mostly in violation of WP:BLP. I suspect a week will let things calm down again. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 02:25, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing request. Was unaware of the earlier request, my apologies. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 02:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No no no, please still protect. I made the request yesterday because this was in the news and I anticipated this was going to see a lot of driveby edits from IPs. That had not started yet (thus the decline), but it has now. The protection is still indicated, IMO. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 02:53, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - not yet. Materialscientist (talk) 03:13, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Protected in 2009, Edit warring over why the subject died, might also have potential for PC. Crazynas t 01:22, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Mike V • Talk 06:24, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Protected in 2009 apparently because of an edit war. Crazynas t 01:19, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Mike V • Talk 06:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 05:56, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KrakatoaKatie 06:02, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Likely sockpuppets of blocked user.   little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  05:14, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days , after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KrakatoaKatie 05:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – There have been more page moves after the last move protection expired, but still no attempt to find consensus via a requested move. I think a long period of move protection is necessary to prevent more slow-motion move-warring. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour ♪ talk ♪ 01:16, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. KrakatoaKatie 06:05, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Honestly, we've tried protecting this before, and vandalism is still always inserted after the protection expries. I think indefinite protection is necessary in this case. StringTheory11 (t • c) 03:12, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 03:15, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IPs trying to redirect the article (and trying to close the AfD) before the AfD has been closed by an admin. Frietjes (talk) 20:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - There only appear to be a couple of IP edits doing this so there aren't really enough to justify protection. Please relist if it continues. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:41, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
it continues, check again. Frietjes (talk) 23:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I was going to list this here as well. Another IP went so far as to edit the admin's AfD outcome comments in order to make it seem like the decision was something other than what it was (the IP changed it from no consensus to redirect). This is getting a little out of hand and needs another look. Thanks! --Nick—Contact/Contribs 00:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected., as is the AfD debate. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent test edits/vandalism on this blp. Harsh (talk) 13:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Requesting immediate archiving... Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:11, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Protected for vandalism, article edited once in the last year, open it up?. Crazynas t 21:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: protected for BLP concerns in 2009, 3 edits in the last year, open this up?. Crazynas t 21:14, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:47, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Or PC, BLP 2 edits in last year. Crazynas t 21:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: BLP policy violations – Unregistered users repeatedly add unsourced information about his nationality. We have yalked to them but they continue. LlamaAl (talk) 21:25, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent continuous IP vandalism Span (talk) 19:33, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:44, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article is being hit with ANON vandalism. reddogsix (talk) 15:25, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done – user warning seems to have done the trick. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined (procedural tagging) Armbrust The Homunculus 18:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – IP 192.54.222.3 has a history of edit warring with other users. Keeps adding content thats already stated in other sections. Harlem Baker Hughes (talk) 00:37, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. Revert warring by a single IP user does not warrant full protection. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Declined (procedural tagging) Armbrust The Homunculus 18:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Archive/2013/02&oldid=1147948858"