This page contains a rolling archive of recent requests for page protection. This page is updated by a bot; please don't edit this page unless you are manually unarchiving a thread to continue a discussion. By default, any requests from the last 7 days can be viewed here, and older requests will be removed. Currently, no permanent archive of page protection requests is kept. To see older requests for page protection, you can search through the revision history of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection.
Note: I would like to leave this unprotected, as a sort of testing-area for drafts...it's not far fetched that people use it for just that. Lectonar (talk) 13:34, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Lectonar: I kind of agree (and will put the page on my watchlist) but note that Draft:Test is create-protected. Should it be? —Kusma (t·c) 13:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Lectonar, Kusma - We should remove the creation protection from Draft:Test and maybe consider creating both pages with templates that designate them as test pages? Either way, I agree in that I don't think that it's unreasonable for users to create pages named "draft test" or "test" in the draft space. In fact, I'd say that it's a good move on their part if they're unsure of how the wizard behaves, what it does, and where everything goes when they click the button. They're measuring twice and cutting once; good on them for doing that, and we shouldn't get in the way or prohibit reasonable attempts for users to do this. ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 07:14, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection:Audrey Geisel is a simple redirect (to a section in the article about her husband, Dr. Seuss) which is unlikely to ever require much, if any, editing, and is a frequent target of vandalism by IPs with an apparent ax to grind about this person [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] --В²C☎ 20:08, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it has been restored now, but much of the original history is missing. All of the vandalism edits are gone, which is good, but the latest version is from 2017 and there were legit updates since then having to do with categories and templates that changed after she passed. --В²C☎ 21:44, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored the Dec 2018 edit I believe Born2cycle was talking about and pushed it forward over the recent correction, noting that the difference arises because of the temporary deletion. It looked like the other edits were reverting vandalism back and forth, so my thinking would be they don't need to be restored, but correct me if I missed anything. Samsara 22:48, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Enigmaman, Samsara - Why was this page deleted? And why is it only being partially restored? Why are we keeping parts of the edit history deleted? No rationale was given in the deletion log, and I'm confused as to what's going on and exactly why. Can you explain so that I understand? :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 22:51, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah: I did not understand it either, so I restored the one edit that B2C seemed to be referring to and that seemed completely safe and innocuous. The principle being, if you don't understand it, try and be conservative around it until someone can clarify. Samsara 06:02, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Samsara, the result of re-adding the other edits is helpful (thank you!) but makes my latest edit (from today) not only moot but looks counter-productive. Could it be deleted? --В²C☎ 23:14, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Highly-transcluded template. The link table for Template:JCW-type hasn't yet been updated, but it's on ~890 pages, much like Template:JCW-legend is. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:00, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MelanieN: the others in Category:Journals Cited by Wikipedia templates are semi-protected. Don't really see why this one should be more highly protected. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:54, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I pretty much routinely use template protection for highly cited templates. If someone wants to change this to semi-protection that's fine with me. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:24, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@MelanieN: could you then please semiprotect instead? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:54, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you feel that will be adequate, I will - since I see that all of this series is basically your work. Of course you, being a template editor, can edit it even under template protection. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:58, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It doesn't harm my work if it's template protected, there's just little reason for template protection to apply here, and I'd rather keep things editor friendly. If someone finds a typo in ((JCW-type)), well an edit request is just an annoying hurdle. Things would be different if this was something that would be visible from mainspace, or that would affect multiple Wikiprojects, but this is rather in the deep end of WP Journals. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Heavy disruption by IP editors. Possible too much for pending changes. StaticVapormessage me! 03:02, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected., hopefully will die down enough for PC. -- ferret (talk) 03:38, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP/new account vandalism. Could block them too, but a 24h protection would be helpful at the moment. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:53, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 01:50, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator Oshwah. MelanieN (talk) 02:40, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent disruption/vandalism from IP hoppers. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 19:48, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Actively monitoring the page... I'm leaving it unprotected on purpose for a few hours to make sure that I've blocked all of the ranges that the user controls and that none were missed. Afterwards, I'll apply protection to the page. ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 20:27, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not done - No edits have touched the page since I blocked the IP ranges involved. I think we should leave it unprotected. If anything, it'll result in the user adding more disruption, which will make it easy for us to spot, revert, and block. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 22:47, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: The player made a request to FIFA to switch national allegiance from Portugal to Canada. It was approved, but Canada has not asked him to play for them so by WP:FOOTY rules, he's still Portuguese. Fellow Canadians are being a bit to quick in changing his nationality. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:29, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: For many reasons, this article is about women in India, they tell what Indian feminists say but wall women in India would protect some articles, I've been pleased!. Triangle3670 (talk) 00:44, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, continuing after end of most recent protection. Needs to be locked from bored school children. 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Samsara 22:36, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Constant addition of the same false story that is attempting to be written as the truth by a variety of anonymous sources, despite the fact sources with the actual story were given. It is getting to the point that a non-IP user is pretending to be the creator of the brand with this fake story. --ZootyCutie (talk) 15:04, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Also blocked DAVIDUGLY1 indefinitely for continued disruptive editing and other violations. ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 20:22, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – This article really needs constant protection. Whenever it is left unprotected numerous IP editors swarm with unsourced content. { [ ( jjj1238 ) ] } 16:35, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ashley Qualls(edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)Semi-protection: Different IP addresses keep inserting offensive nonsense in this page. History shows a lot of edits in the recent past were reverts of vandalism also. No reason to let IP addresses keep vandalizing this page. DreamFocus 19:15, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: As the owner of this bot, I would like to request that my bot's userpage gets semi-protected in line with my own userpage which is also semi-protected. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:35, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I've also added indefinite full move protection to the user page so that no move vandalism can happen. ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 20:24, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Reduction in protection level: From semi- and move-protection to unprotected. This page is part of an incomplete page move by swap. Notwithstanding, as it is now a redirect, protection not needed. Previous protecting administrator is inactive. Bsherr (talk) 15:38, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and disruptive edits. Debiit (talk) 13:04, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:@Ymblanter: I do not understand why you give unfair protection of those 3 articles that I recently published to a user who does not understand several tips in his discussion page and here I have tried to add Rica Fukami's birth reference because I realized that in the Japanese Wikipedia article I did not see the actress's birth year nor is it singer, rather is a narrator of anime series but with its reversals the IPs like us consider us as cross-wikis in different languages in Wikipedia, as it does in Wikidata right here and threatens us with wanting to block us globally so easily. 152.0.140.236 (talk) 16:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editors changing marriage status and personal life section repeatedly without giving sources/references.
MiarrenEmily (talk) (talk) 10:48, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection., these were indeed BLP violations, but the article has not been edited for more than a week.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:30, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editors changing marriage status in personal life section repeatedly without giving sources/references. MiarrenEmily (talk) (talk) 10:49, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection., these were indeed BLP violations, but the article has not been edited for more than a week.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:31, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent level of IP vandalism, with the style of edits between the various IPs being the same and suggesting the same person is constantly making disruptive edits. Even if warned through the IP they recently used, it hasn't discouraged them conducting this behaviour. GUtt01 (talk) 12:43, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 14:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Registered user continuously provides inaccurate information in regards to player statistics from unsourced or poorly sourced content. Persistent vandalism – Registered user also refuses to reorganize the layout of the players statistics section within article based on the player's point total on a scale from most points to least. Inaccurate information often has to be corrected. Yowashi (talk) 08:51, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Various IPs continually add unsourced credits for characters that might not even be in the final movie. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 03:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I don't see that much disruption. Drmies (talk) 04:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined - I don't see disruptive edits or entries in the edit history indicative of frequently having to undo or revert vandalism. Where exactly is this disruption at? ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 07:36, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – A user seems to change the title "Hazarajat" into "Hazaristan" in the opening lede and infobox without any discussion. Khestwol (talk) 08:03, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, before your edit today the page has not been edited for 10 days.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:04, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection:BLP policy violations – Continuing BLP violations; pending changes may be the better option here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:10, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 08:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator Oshwah.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:03, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Short version: Requesting semi-protection (would prefer indef ECP, but my read of the policy doesn't seem to allow that) for these two articles. Wouldn't mind admins watchlisting them either.
Long version:
Someone or ones have a bee up their bonnet about feminist literary criticism of Shakespeare's plays. Hamlet is their latest target (edit summaries given where one was present / relevant):
882984228—Stop reverting this!!! If there was a section called nazism you would never allow it. Feminism nowadays is to males what nazism was to jews so stop adding text under that name!
828946232—"Feminist Critique" being promulgated as valid. Zero justification given on why the feminist lens, as opposed to an equally arbitrary 'inanimate objects lens', should be given a platform.
828775824—No justification offered for the incorporation of the arbitrary 'feminist critique'. A lack of amputees in 'The Tempest' would justify the addition of section dubbed "amputee criticism"? Common sense need be applied, unless propagating a biased narrative of course
828737896—To give credence to 'feminist theory' would be to invite any of the innumerable theories that spawn out of a biased outlook. A rather slippery slope.
826719658—[while reverting to their own edit] Please discuss on talk page before reverting without explanation or consensus
826708064—Removing section irrelevant to the main subject; fringe opinion (also possible OR)
822148611—removing section with little content and relevance to the subject (also, possible OR?)
811092553—Why do we need to know what the far-left thinks about The Tempest? If a Fascist criticism of The Tempest existed, would you let someone add that to this article? I think not.
751716434—People reading this article don't need to know the opinions of leftist extremists.
738838391—Would a piece of literature encompassing an all-animal cast receive "anthropological criticism"? Case in point, feminist criticism need not always apply.
733661422—Deleted an illogical section. If every literary work *must* contain an equal gender representation, this will clearly limit the degree of freedom that authors possess
These all come from a variety of different IP addresses, and have used the accounts ObservingEgo (currently indef'ed by 331dot per NOTHERE) and Arnol Chuarseneger (not currently blocked).
Note that (in the interest of complete transparency), when I previously requested page protection for this for The Tempest the request was handled by Ivanvector who at least initially assessed it to be a content dispute (see discussion at their talk page). I disagree with that assessment: this is either a single POV-warrior using open proxies, or it's meatpuppeting and off-wiki coordination (I'm betting it's the latter). Note that the edits all reflect a very specific world view, are focussed on literary criticism and Shakespeare, and use edit summaries that read like they are different people's attempts to express a common argument articulated in a off-wiki forum somewhere. Note also the variable familiarity with Wikipedia policies: a few edits give pseudo-policy arguments reflecting a superficial or second-hand familiarity with their existence, while some argue without apparent awareness of Wikipedia's policies or practices.
I am now so fed up with this (and the overwhelming stream of unrelated low-grade vandalism at Hamlet) that my preference would be to see both Hamlet and The Tempest put under indef extended confirmed protection (but my read of the policy suggests it doesn't permit that for this case), and range blocks applied to the IPs this is coming from as and when they pop up (given these are quite likely to be open proxies, that would help other issues too). However, even just a stint of semi-protection would probably make them lose interest for a while (until the next round). (Note that while Shakespeare articles are covered by DS due to WP:ARBSAQ, it's for an unrelated issue. This would be something like WP:ARBGG, if anything, but I don't think it applies or I'd have requested a babysitter for the articles over at AE. IOW, whatever remedies are needed here will have to be under the general policy framework.)
It would also help a lot if some admins watched these articles specifically (vs seeing them in a firehose of unpatrolled edits) and was aware of the above context when the next batch of these edits show up (pinging Oshwah, Favonian, Materialscientist who have helped deal with some of the latest batch). Given this is persistent long-term (at least back to 2016, but I'm pretty sure I've seen it long prior to that too) abuse with occasional attempts at misdirection by referring to policies, I'm hoping it might be justified to maybe be a bit more trigger-happy with blocking when edits that match this MO start appearing.
Because I just cannot kep agonizing over whether I am violating the letter of WP:3RR and WP:EW every time this shows up! --Xover (talk) 08:19, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Checking to see if protection is necessary. Ymblanter (talk) 08:31, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, Ymblanter! I hope I didn't step on any of your toes! I didn't see that you were looking into this until after I did. I went ahead and applied semi-protection to Hamlet for one week due to the recent disruption, but did not apply any protection to The Tempest due to no recent disruption being currently made, and the disruption listed in this report being from too long ago. I'll leave the rest to you... ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 08:51, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah: No problem, I was also distracted by smth else and it took longer than it should have taken. I applied an indefinite semi for Hamlet, since I just do not see any good IP edits in any recent history, and the recent disruption was too strong. For the Tempest, I agree that currently there is no evidence we need semi, but I believe the article which gets vandalized on a regular basis could benefit from pending changes, which I applied for a year.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:02, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary extended confirmed: Persistent sockpuppetry – Requesting long-term semi or EC protection due to recent LTA activity. IanDBeacon (talk) 06:33, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I think that this is the most appropriate protection level, since it'll both enable reviewing for edits made to this article as well as leave it open as a "honey pot". Else, the LTA user will simply find a different page to vandalize and it'll take longer to locate, associate as LTA abuse by this user, and move forward from there. In situations like these, it's best to let them keep hitting the same page that we know he's been abusing and can watch, so that the sock users can be reported and blocked quickly. Pending changes protection will assure that nothing changed by the LTA user will be publicly viewable. Perfect solution. ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 07:42, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. – Repeated vandalism from anonymous IPs over a long period of time. Temporary semi-protection was not sufficient, the vandal keeps coming back. KILNA (talk) 07:03, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The IP range is much too wide to block - too much collateral damage. This protection level will stop future disruption from going live until reviewed, and allow anyone to make productive changes to the article. ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs) 07:45, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Lots more vandalism since the previous protection expired. John of Reading (talk) 07:19, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – 13 attempts over 11 months by various editors to add non-notable YouTuber as a notable alumnus. Three month protection over this issue ineffective as edits restarted only 2 days after protection ended. Meters (talk) 20:25, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated hoax edits (from an IP in Oman that might be an open proxy) claiming that Western Papua has become an independent state, and no longer is an Indonesian province (which of course would have been all over the news if it had been true...). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 21:42, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A campaign to post attacks, using both accounts and IP editing. . Breaking sticks (talk) 23:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 07:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection:BLP policy violations – Repeated attacks from a variety of IPs over a long period of time. Bradv🍁 23:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Frequent vandalism and BLP violations by IP editors. Has been protected in the past. StaticVapormessage me! 05:01, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite extended confirmed: Persistent disruptive editing – This page has been subject to a seemingly politically motivated historical revisionist.
The disruptive edits may be coming all from one person (SPI just opened today) -- They were originally using a longterm stable account with 600 edits, but then they began to edit-war and got a temporary block, then made a new account, and both got permanently blocked. After a few weeks a third named account made the same edit, I opened an SPI and before it even got looked at an IP address started making the same edits so I know am pursuing page protection as the (presumed) individual would just keep using IPs to pursue their agenda. JesseRafe (talk) 21:39, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This page has never been protected before; let's see if this period will be sufficient. Dekimasuよ! 01:22, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – A different person of the same name died recently, and IP addresses are now persistently trying to claim that the article subject has died, based on confusion due to the similar names. At least one IP has persisted in this after their mistake was pointed out to them. Article needs semi-protection to stop this. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 23:06, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Enigmamsg 02:17, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Content dispute/edit warring by one or more IPs; IP hopping is involved. Jalen D. Folf(talk) 23:47, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not really a content dispute at this point, just page blanking and waiting for reversion. funplussmart (talk) 23:57, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 00:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator MarnetteD. Enigmamsg 02:19, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism due to basketball tournament. The page has had to be protected in the past because of this as well. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 19:54, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:59, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – IPs editing disruptively since last protection expired. Should probably be semi'd this time. Aspening (talk) 20:39, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:05, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and disruptive editing from IPs. Featured article. Vital article. High visibility article. Not one bona fide change so far in 2019; rest has been IP vandaloism and Bot or editor reverts. Was semi-protected until June 2018. Request semi-protection for 90 days. Hawkeye7(discuss) 20:45, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Seems to be a vandal magnet, although for obvious reasons. Kingerikthesecond (talk) 21:00, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:03, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and disruptive editing from IPs. Please protect until at least March 31, as the current season ends on that date, and any vandalism will slow down after that. Thank you. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:51, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Looking at the article's history, it seems like there is a vandal, who is capable of IP hopping, who is willing to vandalise the page indefinitely until we protect it. I am completely guessing here, but I wonder whether it's a Turkish nationalist who thinks that the lack of protection here compared with the presidents of other countries is some sort of slur? Can't decide whether we should ignore per WP:DENY or just protect to stop the disruption - thought an admin should consider though. . GirthSummit (blether) 18:15, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ~ Amory(u • t • c) 18:47, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism restarted immediately after previous protection expired. Alex Cohn(let's chat!) 18:30, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 11 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ~ Amory(u • t • c) 18:52, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This is an odd one, but the sandbox is being used to insert some very contentious material about a presumably living person. . Larry Hockett (Talk) 18:48, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done Removed the page entirely. ~ Amory(u • t • c) 19:04, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Requesting immediate archiving... ~ Amory(u • t • c) 19:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 5 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. ~ Amory(u • t • c) 15:51, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Jim Boeheim is involved in a current event which has led to persistent vandalism -- notably changing his Title in the infobox to variations of "Killer". SamCordesTalk 16:14, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GABgab 17:10, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:58, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Long term semi-protection: Persistent edit-warring Mobile editor, with different mobile IP accounts. GoodDay (talk) 17:53, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. The pending changes protection is still there, and the article has never been semi-protected before, let us start with two weeks and see what happens.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:00, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: IP editor editing against consensus and not engaging with discussion. We'll be hitting 3RR territory soon. Bondegezou (talk) 16:23, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – IP editor repeatedly adding hoax to articles. Ravensfire (talk) 13:50, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. (both articles) Airplaneman ✈ 14:45, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The day after semi-protection is lifted, the article was vandalized twice. Last time protection was removed (in November, called JUUL then), the article was vandalized 6 days later. This is a high-visibility article (110,000 views in the last 30 days counting the name it was just moved from) and it seems to attract a lot of middle and high school student IP vandals, unsurprising given the topic. If it's indefinitely protected we can hopeful avoid this vandalism. Chumash11 (talk) 14:24, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Same IP hopping LTA continues to add hoax information to article. TarkusABtalk 11:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 11:35, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent recreation of an article redirected through AfD process. Onel5969TT me 12:51, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 13:25, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:42, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: ping me for further problems or leave me a note. I suspect the block won't be long enough Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection Attracting a significant amount of vandalism and disruptive editing at present, it is a BLP. PatGallacher (talk) 15:58, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Tough one-- collateral damage but needed anyway Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism started up again immediately after previous protection period recently expired. 77.73.66.100 (talk) 04:48, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Enigmamsg 05:22, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – SPA with a possible conflict of interest moving incomplete draft into mainspace. Please protect the title in mainspace as well if possible. Thank you. GSS (talk|c|em) 05:42, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Extended confirmed: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent readdition of declined CSD tag. Adam9007 (talk) 01:54, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: It's just the one person, who I don't think is autoconfirmed, and if he does it again, I will block him. Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:00, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, particularly during/following the airing of an episode. This article has about 20,000 user views per day and 80,000+ when an episode airs. Heartfox (talk) 03:23, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 03:55, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Request removal of semi-protection: The article was semi-protected years ago. Article protection is no longer needed. QuackGuru (talk) 00:38, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 00:46, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to ping the two most recently involved admins, as they may be more familiar with the goings-on with the article: @Arthur Rubin and King of Hearts:. As the long protection log shows, the article has suffered from perennial abuse, so unprotection should be carefully considered. Airplaneman ✈ 02:48, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm no longer an admin, but I have no reason to doubt that pro-chiropractic vandalism will continue if semi-protection is removed. — Arthur Rubin(talk) 13:01, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, no. My suggestion would be to propose desired edits on the talk page using the requested edit format referenced on this page. Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:34, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not done per the above. Enigmamsg 02:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Appears to be affected by IP hopper who likes to remove units for picture sizes, causing them to break. Nightfury 16:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:09, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Too low a level and there are good IP's along with the bad IP. Oh, that's pejorative-- misunderstood IP. Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:09, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"misunderstood" is lashon naki, aka "clean speech" :P Enigmamsg 20:17, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Requesting immediate archiving...Enigmamsg 02:38, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary extended confirmed:BLP policy violations – Highly-visible article and persistent (re)addition of erroneous content; may be useful to consider indefinite ECP. Mélencron (talk) 23:59, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think ECP would help. Levivich 02:51, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Brief full protection could work also. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:56, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Extended confirmed protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:01, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: It'll only get worse, won't it? I hate ECP, but I see no choice. Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:01, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Dlohcierekim you are right. He's going to be a major player in next year's presidential election. I'd just protect the page for the next two years. This page is going to be a target for disruptive editing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:08, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
DoneDlohcierekim (talk) 03:16, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Featured article, receiving repeat vandalism from redlink user Editor90000000998765. Darkest TreeTalk 01:23, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:10, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Consistent addition of unsourced casting and other info added to article by unregistered users. Previously been semi-protected for this same reason. Gistech (talk) 22:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection:BLP policy violations – The last semi-protection expired on 1/30/19. Since then, IPs have continued adding BLP violations on at least 8 occasions, as well as prompting the need to revdel 3 edits for serious BLP violations. Hopefully a longer protection will end that. DannyS712 (talk) 00:23, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 00:34, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Lordtobi (✉) 17:25, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Continued edit warring from you two will result in a block, which will leave the article open for editing from others. Malinaccier (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Still an issue with persistent vandalism by unregistered users, as soon as the protection expired someone got at it again. Alohawolf (talk) 20:58, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Bernie Sanders, independent, declared today he would seek the Democratic Party nomination for US President in 2020. RSes still (for now) refer to him as an "independent", but different registered editors have been changing the infobox to Democrat and back again all day. A discussion is underway on the talk page. A short (24-48hr) full PP might help that discussion proceed without making the page unstable. Thank you. Levivich 00:25, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: As far as I can see, the situation is rather stable; I do not see a need for protection right now, but will defer to my colleagues. Lectonar (talk) 11:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Lectonar, agreed, it stabilized after I made this post and seems to have remained quiet since. I'll take that as a sign of my amazing Wikipedia powers :-) Sorry for the false alarm. Levivich 16:03, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Although it's tempting to request indefinite since this IP range seems very unwilling to give up their tendentious editing. Recently protected by Zzuuzz, we now get to enjoy salty edit summaries along with the edit-warring. . ——SerialNumber54129 17:36, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 24 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I don't think it's vandalism, I think it's someone with a conflict of interest trying to whitewash the article. Possibly Ched Evans himself? In any case, it's disruptive but not vandalism - you can't prove the IP is deliberately trying to deface Wikipedia from their point of view. Don't be a dolt, stop and think. I have opened a discussion on the talk page. Ritchie333(talk)(cont) 17:50, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary Semi-protection: This page endures episodes of infantile edit attacks which have required periodic protection. Another outbreak appears to be underway, e.g. "gayhomo" and could benefit from re-protection AllyD (talk) 17:42, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:58, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Currently being vandalised by what seems to be one user under multiple similar IPs. CoconutOctopustalk 10:59, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jayjg(talk) 17:00, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple IP vandalisms in the past day. Protected in the past. Ifnord (talk) 14:16, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 14:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: IP vandalism (so far, both IPs from Argentina, and based on text removed, possibly coordinated by Hands Off Venezuela). This article/event is part of the ongoing 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis, which is on the main page and protected along with Juan Guaidó; the concert will happen this week, and IPs are already deleting cited text. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jayjg(talk) 17:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated vandalism, including by Jio ISP IPs. Various other Pakistani topics are also being vandalised, and some have already been protected. David Biddulph (talk) 15:59, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jayjg(talk) 17:05, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: The article itself has been included nomination for deletion that deals about game notability. In the discussion, the article considered have lack of "secondary reliable sources" that explains the whole topic. Thus, the page have to semi-protected for certain duration in order to prevent further abuse from IP editors. 54.36.115.10 (talk) 20:33, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Always a close call when articles are at AfD, but I do not think the disruption is big enough. Lectonar (talk) 10:45, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Although the article falls under ARPBIA, there is virtually no disruption which would warrant ec-protection. Lectonar (talk) 10:46, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: - IP vandalism both today and yesterday.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:59, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:35, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment:@Dlohcierekim: One or more pages in this request have not been protected.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 18:59, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Question: 2019-02-19T18:34:22 Dlohcierekim (talk | contribs | block) m . . (18,419 bytes) 0 . . (Protected "Melodifestivalen 2019": Persistent disruptive editing ([Edit=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 18:34, 21 February 2019 (UTC)))? Dlohcierekim (talk) 19:02, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Requesting immediate archiving...Lectonar (talk) 11:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism following Home Office press release . Harley Watson (talk) 19:57, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Second this and would add - the article is not about the similarly-named person currently in the news, so aside from vandalism there's a very high likelihood of inaccurate edits. I've fixed a bunch of these in the last 20 minutes but they are reappearing as people read news and come to update with wrong information. 2A02:C7D:5E53:2500:F00E:CE51:5723:F363 (talk) 20:04, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment:@Dlohcierekim: One or more pages in this request have not been protected.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 21:45, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:25, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – due to the edit war regarding page maintainers (myself) and anonymous users regarding an ongoing project, it has been proposed to discuss page content in the talk page to no avail from anonymous users. signed:Donan Raven (talk, contribs) 14:10, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Not every one is able to communicate via edit-summaries or looks at the talk-page of the article; I can see the talk-page of the (always same) IP is red...I would at least try to engage them directly via their talk. Lectonar (talk) 14:14, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: to further discussion. I've explained alternatives to edit warring. Best to open a dialogue first, but the SP will encourage such dialogue. Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:18, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ok will start addressing them through their own talks pages, thank you for advising - (this is subject to scrutiny because it involves the same fund involved in charity work and a luxury yacht... it is also suspected that it is a member of the charity carrying out the edits). signed:Donan Raven (talk, contribs) 14:19, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism and dubious unsourced changes by IP editors. StaticVapormessage me! 07:26, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:24, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – No reason for anyone to be editing this, recent vandalism. Jasper Deng(talk) 07:45, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Content dispute, may also consider blocking the editors. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 08:12, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected., and hopefully someone could close AfD tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:18, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This page is often vandalized by IPs. Temporary protection was done in the past; vandalism still occurs. Requesting indefinite protection. Kees08 (Talk) 03:23, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of A few months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SQLQuery me! 03:26, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. @JSFarman:I know the event isn't until the 24th and that this won't cover until then. I'll be keeping an eye on it and will protect for longer if need be. Airplaneman ✈ 23:26, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please verify good version is restored. Home Lander (talk) 03:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I think you got the "good version". Airplaneman ✈ 03:11, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:50, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Currentl move protected, other protections in the past. Past two days have seen multiple IPs vandalizing, probably something in the news. A short protection increase will probably do the trick. Ifnord (talk) 20:31, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:04, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – 145.255.xxx.xxx is repeatedly changing the established "BCE" style to "BC" without discussion, contrary to MOS:BCE. Page was protected for one week, then three weeks, both times for this reason and the problem resumed each time it expired. Dorsetonian (talk) 20:40, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 21:02, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Extended confirmed protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ideally, this should be done via SPI and blocks, not via protection. Lectonar (talk) 08:10, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: IP editors keep claiming he is running for President of the United States, based on a (publicity stunt) video where he says he is running for President of the Internet. This is unsourced information about a BLP. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:29, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - TNT💖 19:46, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending changes protection: Lately it seems IP vandals want to come here simply to insult her for no apparent reason rather than give any constructive edits. Trillfendi (talk) 18:32, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - TNT💖 19:47, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism after an alleged sexual harrasment scandal, many IPs/new editors are making questionable edits to the page (many of them just disruptive to the reading of the article.) UCO2009bluejay (talk) 15:38, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. Lectonar (talk) 07:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Vandalism the past few days by the same person from three similar IP addresses. Identical diffs: [14], [15], [16] Dan56 (talk) 14:32, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – My talk page has received a great deal of vandalism from different IPs lately, and I would appreciate if my talk page was protected to prevent this. -- /Alex/21 17:50, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Widr (talk) 17:53, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistant spam and disruptive reversions . PRehse (talk) 09:27, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 10:26, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – I'm trying to rework this article (Taiseki-ji) into at least a reliable and readable reference; however, one or two other editors persistently revert changes to their preferred wording, which is frequently semantically inappropriate or ungrammatical as well as in many cases erroneous. To no avail I've attempted to communicate with these editors through embedded comments because they work anonymously and always with different IP addresses (making discussions via their talk pages impossible). I'd appreciate it if an Admin could make the page uneditable by unregistered users till I can at least whip it into shape and provide some citations.
Thanks and best regards, Jim_Lockhart (talk) 08:28, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dlohcierekim (talk) 09:52, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I will work to get everything done within a week. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart (talk) 14:41, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Several IPs in recent days have been falsifying her birthplace. MPFitz1968 (talk) 09:33, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Two new accounts making competing drastic edits including adding NPOV content/original research. McPhail (talk) 21:07, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. MelanieN (talk) 05:45, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 06:25, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Nate Speed socks popped up just as last protection ended.
. Crboyer (talk) 06:33, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 06:55, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This is rather slow and often not editied for weeks; let's try pending changes for a change. Lectonar (talk) 08:20, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi protection: Vandalism right after protection ended. High profile event so unconstructive edits sure to continue. StaticVapormessage me! 01:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:03, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism and addition of unsourced material due to upcoming season and one that just ended. Protection should be longer than the last one. Nihlus 02:26, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:03, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Lots of pending changes getting reverted due to vandalism/unsourced changes. Probably becoming tedious to other editors. StaticVapormessage me! 23:19, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Too much activity right now for PC protection to be effective. The PC protection will persist after the semi-protection expires. MelanieN (talk) 05:59, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to have already been unprotected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 06:25, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Vandalized the past few days by same person from multiple IP addresses. Identical diffs: [17], [18] Dan56 (talk) 21:47, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 05:52, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Vandalized the past few days by same person from multiple IP addresses. Identical diffs: [19], [20] Dan56 (talk) 21:47, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 05:53, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs only bring disruption to this page. Enough is enough. Kingerikthesecond (talk) 20:59, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: pinged as the most recent admin to protect the page. Airplaneman ✈ 21:40, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I see one IP edit which was good and accepted, as well as one IP edit in December which was not reverted, but I am not going to object against an upgrade to semi.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:56, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: I've enacted a 6 month semi as a suggested compromise since the vandalism has been going on for quite some time. It will finish about five months before the PC1 you put on it earlier. I think this is a good solution. Samsara 03:36, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection:The Summit School (Queens, New York) article keeps getting vandalized (i.e., putting former students names' as administrators in the infobox) and I wanted to know if the article can be locked. Thanks. ATC.Talk 21:49, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment:@ATC: This request cannot be parsed. Please ensure it follows formatting consistent with the current or previous methods of submission.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 22:07, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Fixed article link. Enigmamsg 04:20, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Rapid vandalism from multiple ips. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:58, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 01:38, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Unprotect: It has been nearly eight years now, and this was only because someone decided to add their personal news to it on multiple occasions. It was the same story each time and I think, given the amount of time that has passed, it is reasonable to believe the person has long moved on. Let’s try unprotection. Bolt Strike (talk) 01:07, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Unprotected — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:25, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection Much vandalism and disruption by IPs. Orientls (talk) 07:12, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Likely collateral damage as one or several users who are making improvements would be affected by the requested protection. I don't see it, I see some content disputes, which are inevitable on a new article about an ongoing event, but no clear-cut vandalism or disruption. Fish+Karate 15:15, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
fully protected: Personal information regarding subject and family such as location and names continues to be published. Apvediting (talk) 17:46, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Airplaneman ✈ 18:54, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Peristent vandalism/removal of referenced material by IPs. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:59, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 20:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Unprotection: Semi-protected for 5 years, can probably try unprotection again. Had only been protected twice before. Protecting admin has not edited since November. — MRD2014Talk 19:41, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection:BLP policy violations – Article recently broken out from Jussie Smollett which has had repeated BLP violations, and which is currently semi protected. ResultingConstant (talk) 17:38, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done Considering this event is what caused all the problematic edits to the parent article, I think it's reasonable to protect this to match that article. Enigmamsg 19:35, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing multiple-IP vandalism (repeated attempts to describe the school as a prison). Dorsetonian (talk) 18:30, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 19:10, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – IPs restoring contentious infobox. Subject has been discussed in corresponding article talk pages, and the box was removed by an editor with an account in January as a solution for divergent standpoints, but it is being boldly restored by IPs. Edin balgarin (talk) 10:21, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not done@Edin balgarin: I do not see where this has been discussed previously, so this appears to be just a content dispute. It certainly has not been discussed previously on Talk:Sicilians, so where has it been discussed? You cannot expect people to know what you're referring to and where to look without providing them a link to the discussion. Fish+Karate 15:35, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Consistent astroturfing, adding unsourced and politcally biased content to the page, even after it has been consistently deleted by mods.
Not done Protection isn't needed, there aren't any rapid ongoing issues. I've tagged the article as unreferenced and as a stub. Fish+Karate 14:16, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Socking editor pushing his autobiography repeatedly. See [21] as well as the deletion log for evidence. Kb03 (talk) 14:19, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Once in last two months is not "repeatedly". Fish+Karate 15:35, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. + Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This seems to flare up year after year. Lectonar (talk) 16:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Recurrent IP edits to change title of film to the production title; film is still officially untitled, release title has not yet been announced. – Nick Mitchell 98talk 05:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fish+Karate 14:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple vandalism attempts from the past 3 days, mostly today and it is still ongoing. AryanTheArticleArtist (talk) 09:24, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Article also needs a lot of references, tagged accordingly. Fish+Karate 15:25, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary extended confirmed users protection: Persistently vandalised by single-use accounts. Michail (blah) 13:30, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. @Philly boy92: - extended confirmed protection may only be applied if semi-protection proves ineffective. Please return here if that proves to be the case. Fish+Karate 15:30, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Long-term Semi-protection: Persistent pushing by ever changing IP account, of future uncertain date of accession, which in itself is a breach of WP:Crystal. PS: Note that IP(s) refuse to respond to questions at its IP pages & merely blanks them. GoodDay (talk) 15:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Both. Lectonar (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – 3RR violated, addition of promotional content. SITH(talk) 21:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Accounts edit-warring are new users. The edit warring notice board is a more appropriate venue, though. Fish+Karate 14:18, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Creation protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 12:34, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite pending changes: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent use of the article for advertising to draw in new pupils. See the prior discussion here where the new user makes clear that he adds the info for promotion. A series of IPs have done the same. The Bannertalk 00:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. + Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:21, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term sexist and political vandalism by IPs, as she's famously vocal about such issues. She has a big movie release next month, so I think a month-long protection is necessary at this point. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 05:38, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Formatting damage. I recommend that others add this page to their watchlists. I believe the damage is likely unintentional, but for some reason, the damage remained unnoticed all day. This is the third time I had to repair that page. And that’s only from today and yesterday. This is a fairly popular page (more than 1,200 views per day) and the damaged infobox will confuse anyone who visits this page in its damaged state. Bolt Strike (talk) 19:36, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined for now as the disruptive user and their likely ip sock have been blocked. Feel free to bring back if disruption resumes. XymmaxSo let it be writtenSo let it be done 03:12, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent, continuous and overlapping vandalism. This time a previous reviewer caught one IP's vandalism but missed the previous vandalism. I'll suggest indefinite, because the vandalism is still ongoing this many years later. Tarl N. (discuss) 03:17, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Correction - since both IPs in question were from Malaysia, it was probably the same individual rather than independent overlapping vandalism. Tarl N. (discuss) 03:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It has enough watchers, and there were two IP edits recently that, while not huge advances, were unquestionably positive, so I'd like to maintain the opportunity for new users to work on this article. And PC1 comes with an annoyance tax that's probably not worth paying in this case (yet - fingers crossed). Samsara 16:22, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Likely collateral damage as one or several users who are making improvements would be affected by the requested protection. Samsara 16:22, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – IP keeps adding disputed content that has been reverted by myself and by Drmies, Thanks, . –Davey2010Talk 20:16, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: The disruptive editing wasn't completely stopped with the previous partial protection, but it's much worse without. --Ronz (talk) 03:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 03:31, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. but given it's already been protected twice this year, I think the protection is appropriate anyway. Enigmamsg 21:46, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Return to vandalism following the expiration of protection a few days ago. StaticVapormessage me! 22:48, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Airplaneman ✈ 23:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Recent uptick in vandalism from various IPs, such as unjustified deletion of refs. Dl2000 (talk) 18:12, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 21:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The article is experiencing vandalism from both IP's and Logged in users. . AryanTheArticleArtist (talk) 18:09, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck°needs to be running more often 18:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck°needs to be running more often 18:28, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary Semi-protection: High level of vandalism from same user, using multiple IP addresses. Difficult to issue warning or block just one IP address. Request for 30 days semi-protection.AmericanHistorian (talk) 18:20, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 18:28, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck°needs to be running more often 18:34, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Lots of disruptive, POV editing by IP editors over the past couple of days. Ravensfire (talk) 18:27, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck°needs to be running more often 18:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi- protection: Persistent disruptive editing from IP's and Under attack from numerous anon editors. Xain36 (talk) 15:30, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck°needs to be running more often 18:06, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck°needs to be running more often 18:08, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A previous semi-protection ended last week, and the same pattern of vandalism resumed. Clearly the same person, from revolving IP addresses, introducing large amounts of technical nonsense to disrupt the page. The same person has been seen to vandalise some other railway-related pages, but is constantly targeting this one. Timothy TitusTalk To TT 16:51, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I believe a rangeblock was also applied in an effort to thwart this anon. caknuck°needs to be running more often 18:11, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An army of IPs and new accounts have been involved in a campaign of concerted vandalism on numerous Pakistani topics today. David Biddulph (talk) 17:28, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--regentspark (comment) 17:38, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Sudden increase of vandalism from anon accounts. Page has been protected several times previously for the same reason. LugnutsFire Walk with Me 17:46, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. caknuck°needs to be running more often 18:13, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Another Pakistan-related page. Perhaps this one may benefit from a long term pending changes protection, but a short semi would be helpful for now. 72 (talk) 16:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:54, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Another Pakistan-related article. Semi needed similar to recent protection of Lahore. 72 (talk) 16:47, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Disruptive editing with useless and inaccurate/false information in an unorganised way. Justlookingforthemoment (talk) 11:51, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent addition of a promotional external link from various similar IP addresses. I couldn't find any mention of a publisher called 'Out of the Blue' on Wikipedia. Leschnei (talk) 14:40, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--regentspark (comment) 16:24, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--regentspark (comment) 16:23, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi- protection: Persistent disruptive editing from IP's and Under attack from numerous anon editors. Xain36 (talk) 15:20, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP continues to change nationality with no explanation. PamD 11:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined. PamD, you really should have knowm better. Why do not you warn the IP and then report them to 3RNN if they continue disruptive editing or re-report them here if a new IP appears?--Ymblanter (talk) 11:21, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:46, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Extended confirmed: Persistent disruptive editing – The page has been semi protected a couple of times, most recently three months which expired a couple of weeks ago. Since then, the same disruption has resumed, by at least half a dozen different IPs who don't understand Wikipedia's notion of neutrality or reliable sources. ECP might be useful given that these are unregistered accounts. bonadeacontributionstalk 12:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – All edits from this year are either vandalism or the removal thereof. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:33, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 13:12, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary Semi-protection: High level of vandalism from same user, using multiple IP addresses. Difficult to issue warning or block just one IP address. Request for 30 days semi-protection. AmericanHistorian (talk) 03:20, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite pending changes: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – IP accounts keep adding unsourced venues to the list (that often do not even meet the criteria for the list). Soronast (talk) 11:07, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected., let us see how it works and upgrade to indef after it expires.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:23, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Block evader using an IP has been adding hoaxes onto the page. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No, but it's probably fine to lower it to template protection. It looks like most of the other similar public-domain-notice templates that have lots of transclusions are template protected, so let's do that here as well until there is a consensus to do otherwise. I'll go and do it now. — Mr. Stradivarius♪ talk ♪ 05:09, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:18, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: If he was convicted, then no need to rev del. Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:18, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
True enough, Dlohcierekim. Just bristled at an edit history which made the offense the primary claim to fame. Thank you, 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: He made controversial comments on the 2019 Pulwama attack and so is suffering a wave of nationalistic vandalism from IPs and new editors (e.g. calling him a traitor, changing his birthplace to Pakistan). A week or so should be sufficient for things to die down.—Neil P. Quinn (talk) 17:23, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Samsara 04:08, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Getting heavy attention after the NBA Slam Dunk contest today. CrispyCream27 • talk • user page 03:47, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Samsara 04:05, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection:BLP policy violations – Persistent disruptive editing due to a recent news story. Prefall 01:54, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 02:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Disruptive editing from IP address, which is repeatedly adding category relating to Halperin's ethnicity, without any evidence it is correct. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 02:06, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The underlying PC protection will persist when the semi-protection expires. MelanieN (talk) 02:49, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection:BLP policy violations – Persistent disruptive editing due to a recent news story. Prefall 02:29, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MelanieN (talk) 02:51, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeat vandalism over two days by (assumedly) the same person using different IP addresses. . Gaia Octavia AgrippaTalk 19:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 18:52, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 17:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Upcoming event. Unregistered IPs keep removing information from the page that is bad public relations for the event. JW (talk) 17:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - TNT💖 21:25, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Pending-changes has not done much to curb the vandalism/disruptive edits. Articles of countries should be indefinitely semi-protected anyways, they all seem like high-risk articles. Kingerikthesecond (talk) 14:13, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Another target of a vandalism spree/sockpuppetry. PC here is also ineffective. Kingerikthesecond (talk) 14:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not fresh enough. Samsara 16:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Samsara 16:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Regular edits from anonymous IPs to focus lede on emphasizing specific racial groups with crime. Topic is EXTREMELY sensitive and contentious. Seazzy (talk) 15:07, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dlohcierekim (talk)
Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:27, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I left a hidden text note for pc reviewers Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:27, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite pending changes: Persistent disruptive editing – I don't usually request indefinite protections, much less PC indefinite, but India-Pakistan has been a very hot topic in the area for a long time. There's been edit warring for a long time to keep a specific POV and WP:FRINGE pushing. Dat GuyTalkContribs 10:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would support a temporary semi protection of 1 week. Shashank5988 (talk) 10:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Area of strong editing conflict recognised by ArbCom, and this particular page has a long protection log and history of perennial disruption. Samsara 11:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ymblanter: 14 of the last 50 edits have been reverts, let alone the vandal edits. As the May election approaches, the article of this politician is only going to get more vandalised. Please place protection on this article. Onetwothreeip (talk) 08:58, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: But the last 50 edits go back several months, and we do not protect preemptively. After the applied block, there is not enough disruptive activity to warrant protection. Lectonar (talk) 09:06, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Ongoing LTA vandalism; this is one of the main target pages of Cruizir so should probably be PC'd long term as well. Aspening (talk) 07:51, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Samsara 09:21, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 03:34, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Samsara 07:26, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Page has been protected in the past but after protection wore off vandalism is continuing . HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 06:31, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 8 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Samsara 07:29, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – ongoing new user vandalism. Aspening (talk) 01:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 01:48, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator Maile66. MelanieN (talk) 03:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection: We are seeing revisions. Sherenk1 (talk) 11:16, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Likely collateral damage as one or several users who are making improvements would be affected by the requested protection. This is an ongoing event; I do not see many disruptive edits, more reactions on the incoming news. Lectonar (talk) 11:23, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Resumption of disruptive editing after protection expired. IanDBeacon (talk) 23:00, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 23:18, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]