| Revision as of 23:16, 2 June 2006 view sourceDuhon~enwiki (talk | contribs)1,394 editsm Kobe Bryant← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:21, 2 June 2006 view source AmiDaniel (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,065 edits →Current requests for unprotection: Move Kobe to the top, +unprotectedNext edit → | ||
| Line 89: | Line 89: | ||
| ###############Please only edit below this line.###############--> | ###############Please only edit below this line.###############--> | ||
| ⚫ | ===={{La|Kobe Bryant}}==== | ||
| ⚫ | The main reason for the protection was due to the edits of one particular user. This user has seemed to have left and does not appear to prove much of a problem anymore. The page has been protected for near a month now and it should be opened up. ] 2 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :'''Unprotected'''. ] (]) 23:21, 2 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ====]==== | ====]==== | ||
| i think its the coast is clear now.] 22:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC) | i think its the coast is clear now.] 22:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| Line 104: | Line 107: | ||
| :Umm... there's no article by that name. If you can get the correct article name for me, I'll gladly take a look. ] (]) 03:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC) | :Umm... there's no article by that name. If you can get the correct article name for me, I'll gladly take a look. ] (]) 03:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::The article would be ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC) | ::The article would be ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | ===={{La|Kobe Bryant}}==== | ||
| ⚫ | The main reason for the protection was due to the edits of one particular user. This user has seemed to have left and does not appear to prove much of a problem anymore. The page has been protected for near a month now and it should be opened up. | ||
| ] 2 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Current requests for significant edits to a protected page== | ==Current requests for significant edits to a protected page== | ||
Revision as of 23:21, 2 June 2006
| Noticeboards | |
|---|---|
| Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes. | |
| General | |
| Articles, content | |
| Page handling | |
| User conduct | |
| Other | |
| Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards | |
| Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here. | ||
|---|---|---|
|
Shortcuts
Before requesting, read the protection policy. Full protection is used to stop edit warring between multiple users or to prevent vandalism to high-risk templates; semi-protection and pending changes are usually used to prevent IP and new user vandalism (see the rough guide to semi-protection); and move protection is used to stop pagemove revert wars. Extended confirmed protection is used where semi-protection has proved insufficient (see the rough guide to extended confirmed protection) After a page has been protected, it is listed in the page history and logs with a short rationale, and the article is listed on Special:Protectedpages. In the case of full protection due to edit warring, admins should not revert to specific versions of the page, except to get rid of obvious vandalism.
Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level Request unprotection Request a specific edit to a protected page Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here Request edit | ||
 Archives |
|
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 |
Current requests for protection
See archived requests if you cannot find your protection request here.
Request either semi-protection, full protection, or move protection by placing it in bold text (add ''' before and after a word to make it bold) at the beginning of your statement.
Emma Watson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Full Protection Already semied. Right after semi-protection users begin to start vandalizing the page meaning that the page should be Fully Protected. ForestH2
- Too quiet at the moment. Will (@) T 22:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Beta Theta Pi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi-protection: This page is in a revert war over content in one section. Previously the edits were coming from one anonymous user, but it appears a second one has entered the fray and made the problem worse. (Homosexuals are now being classified as "infamous" members.) Contributions from these contributors are often not NPOV. Further, one anonymous user has recently threatened to draw additional parties into the revert war, which he may have just done. Registered users have been fine. Pat 21:10, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Eli Whitney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi-protection against repeated vandalism. This has been a target for anonymous vandals since I started with Misplaced Pages. On the other hand, the content has been quite stable; not much news going on on the Eli Whitney front these days. Of the past 50 edits, there have been 34 anonymous vandalisms, 15 reverts, and 1 category addition. Gzuckier 19:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, not enough activity. -- Kim van der Linde 22:44, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
George Washington (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi-protection against repeated vandalism - as usual, >30 vandals/reverts every day since unprotected.— MFH:Talk 18:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Once again, it would save much work, disk space and integrity of WP if semi-protection for this page would be extended to a longer period (e.g. infinity).
- Well its technically "18.066 marked revert(s) per day", but yes, Sprotected.Voice-of-All 19:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Colin MacIntyre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi-protection against repeated vandalism, by different (new) users (possibly sock-puppets). SaltyWater 17:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- They were vandal only accounts, and have all been indefblocked. Lets see if that stops it. Syrthiss 17:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. My only concern is that users have been blocked for making the same changes before, only for another user (presumably the same person) to return and make the same edits. I'll report any developments back here. SaltyWater 18:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Same changes made again, this time by an anon user. SaltyWater 19:41, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Indefblocked that user as open proxy, but at the same time I wouldn't complain if another admin wanted to semiprotect. I'd personally still rather whack the person behind the vandalism than keep other ip users from editing for at least one more attempt. Syrthiss 19:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Israeli apartheid (phrase) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Full protection ongoing edit war during an AFD. Homey 16:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Homey trying to secure his version of the article. No actual edit war is going on but a discussion in talk in which some editors have expressed an interst to remove some of what Homey has inserted since it clearly does not fit WP:RS so homey want to use a protection to secure his favorite version of the article. Zeq 16:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well I've protected as there seemed to be fair amount of activity in the history. Continually changing versions during an AFD can be disruptive. Feel free to link to particular versions during the AFD discussion if you feel that is needed. Protection is not an endorsement of any particular version. Petros471 16:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- The person who requested protection have done so immediatly after he himself interduced an edit and while he knew sources he used are going to get scurtenized. Please unprotect, most of the activity is from the person that asked for the protection once the article arrived to the shape he wants to keep it. There is no real edit war going on. (in fact very few edits today) . maybe you should replace with semi protection and watch for a while. Zeq 17:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'll let another admin review this. I.e. could another admin take a look at this, and feel free to remove the protection without asking me if you feel that is appropriate. Petros471 17:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
(sigh) look at the history of the article. There have been numerous edits and reverts today on various parts of the article.
"There is no real edit war going on. (in fact very few edits today) ."
There have been over 40 edits today, in fact. Homey 17:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Many of the edits are wikilinks, spelling etc... In fact Homey is the person that have edited more than anyone else this article. In fact he edited over 50 times. He is the one asking for "protection" that is since he is done and does not want any changes. I again suggest to undo the protection and watch. If there is editwar it can be replaied again. Until that time I suggest just to apply semi-protection against IP anon sock ppupets. Zeq 17:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Question: is there a policy against "gaming the system" such as making an controversial edit and running to ask for protection ? Surly this is at least against WP:Point since it disrupt editing by all other editors. Zeq 17:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
No. There's a policy against admins protecting articles they've edited but there's no policy against anyone requesting protection after they've edited the article. In fact, I think you'll find that virtually everyone who puts in a protection request on this page has done so after editing the article in question. Zeq read Misplaced Pages: The Wrong Version]. Homey 19:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Paul Shannon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Semi Protection, members of the school he teaches at are vandalising the page (i.e. saying he got run over by a model train). Saralk
- Single act of vandalism, denied. Just revert and warn-- Kim van der Linde 15:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Current requests for unprotection
See archived requests if you cannot find your unprotection request here.
If you simply want to make spelling corrections or add information to a protected page that is not disputed, and you are not involved in any disputes there, consider simply adding {{Editprotected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page.
Kobe Bryant (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The main reason for the protection was due to the edits of one particular user. This user has seemed to have left and does not appear to prove much of a problem anymore. The page has been protected for near a month now and it should be opened up. Duhon 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Unprotected. AmiDaniel (talk) 23:21, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
wwe
i think its the coast is clear now.SPOV 22:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Unprotected (Note: the page to be unprotected was actually World Wrestling Entertainment. Prodego 22:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
User talk:JackSarfatti (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)
The user is indefinitely banned. However, this page protect hinders renewed discussion about the user's WP track record and possible arguments contrary to the status quo. __meco 20:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- My feelings are it should remain protected. If you feel that there is some aspect of Sarfatti's history that needs to be discussed, it should probably be on the WP:ANI or WP:AN (since I can only assume that "arguments contrary to the status quo" means "arguments as to why he should not be indefblocked"). Syrthiss 20:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Limiting the medium for bringing up such a discussion to the administrators' noticeboard is exquisitley non-transparent. My ground for making this proposal is however that a protect is a measure that should not be kept lingering, like in this case. __meco 21:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- Why should a user who is indefblocked and who tended to soapbox on their talk page after their block be allowed a venue? Denied. Syrthiss 21:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Killridemedly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
The majority of the article vandalism comes from mad Howard Stern fans. Rivals will always have bad blood for each other, so it's useless to have a protected page for Opie and Anthony. Either protect it until Opie and Anthony go off air or remove the lock. killridemedly 20:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Umm... there's no article by that name. If you can get the correct article name for me, I'll gladly take a look. AmiDaniel (talk) 03:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
- The article would be Opie and Anthony. Prodego 19:22, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Current requests for significant edits to a protected page
See archived requests if you cannot find your protected edit request here.
Please demonstrate a good reason for an edit to a protected page. These are only done in exceptional circumstances, or when there is very clear consensus for an edit and continued protection. Please link to the talk page where consensus was reached.
You may also add {{Editprotected}} to the article's talk page if you would like an inconsequential change of some kind made, but note that most of these should simply wait for unprotection.