Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive/2014/02

< Wikipedia:Requests for page protection | Archive | 2014
2014

01 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Frequent IP vandalism. Enescot (talk) 07:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Looks like pending changes is doing it's job. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:19, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: About 80% of edits in the last two months have been vandalism (mostly from anonymous editors from varying IPs) or reverting vandalism. -Thunderforge (talk) 07:04, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:35, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Subject of internet meme so persistent disruptive editing by IPs. Three month protection was automatically removed last week and the IP editing re-started within a couple of days. SagaciousPhil - Chat 06:34, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:34, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi. Edit-warring resumed as soon as it came off PP. Appears to be an ethnic dispute resulting in the rejection of the linguistic classification. — kwami (talk) 21:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 04:50, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Hentai (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Unprotect Talk pages of articles should never be indefinitely protected. This has prevented me from placing an edit request for the article to correct the spelling of a Japanese mass nouns "manga" which is incorrectly spelled "mangas". 24.149.117.220 (talk) 14:53, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Edited the page accordingly. Not an admin. Corvoe (speak to me) 17:17, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unprotected The edit summary indicates the protecting admin intended the protection to expire on 29 July 2013. Diannaa (talk) 17:32, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of vandal activity going on in this page. Request semi-protection for about three months. . EthicallyYours! 06:14, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Disruptive editing and dubious unsourced changes by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 05:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, replacing sourced material with unsourced text etc. Cecil Huber (talk) 00:11, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:05, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:107.150.34.186 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Full protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 22:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. by Rschen7754. Mike V • Talk 23:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full-time semi-protection: Ridiculous changes in Personnel have occurred again after the previous protection expired.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 20:16, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Indefinite pending changes: Tag war between IP editors under way over doctrinal, racial, and LGBT issues. TransporterMan (TALK) 15:02, 31 January 2014 (UTC) Changed to request for semi-protection, one month. — TransporterMan (TALK) 15:21, 31 January 2014 (UTC) And also note this ANI listing which predates this request. — TransporterMan (TALK) 15:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, seems to have begun early this morning and stopped six hours ago. Come back if it picks up again. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:21, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I would like to request protection for this page due to persistent vandalism by an IP address. Thanks and have a good day!. Rockysmile11 (talk) 22:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 23:27, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of unsourced edits that need reverting. JMHamo (talk) 21:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:08, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent Vandalism. Most of the revision history is of vandals and their reversion. . Leoesb1032 (talk) 21:19, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 22:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

02 February 2014

Full protection: Page is currently template-protected, which should not be used on articles. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Disruptive editing and dubious unsourced additions by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 18:49, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:41, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: disruptive editing by IPs. ChanderForYou 16:02, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs from Thailand have added the same peacock words to the article for years. Oda Mari (talk) 07:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 15:23, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiuser13 Please ask the protecting admin before making a request here. You might want to include the reason you want the page unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It should be unprotected because the festival is over.--Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 07:53, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unprotected Mark Arsten (talk) 21:30, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Page is currently template-protected, which should not be used on articles. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 DoneGiven that the template protection is almost expired, I've just dropped it back to indefinite semi. Monty845 19:47, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected indefinitely. (for the bot) tutterMouse (talk) 21:16, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Help:Edit summary[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: rumored to have recently died, lots of driveby edits and reverting. Echoedmyron (talk) 18:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Tariqabjotu.. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Ongoing edit warring over what are claimed to be BLP violations. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 08:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Dealing with it now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:49, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:32, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent template protection Highly visible, highly technical template. This should not be open to general editing, lest [things like this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Val&action=history] happen. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 09:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:42, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. I've checked this several times and instead I've found out that this is the same user who claims that MOR exists in Batangas. And it was really a disambiguation page. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 09:05, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:39, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 07:15, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. (semi for 3 days). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IPs are reverting/edit warring the sourced and ref'd infobox material . Capitalismojo (talk) 07:09, 2 February 2014 (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 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:32, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This request should not affect indef. PC-protection. George Ho (talk) 23:41, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:16, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temp full-protection: Edit wars 88.104.24.150 (talk) 22:57, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Same article, but requesting Temporary semi-protection instead to address the sockpuppetry. The article history does not indicate any recent edit warring that would necessitate full protection. VQuakr (talk) 23:15, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, because [1] - that's a reasonable edit requesting refs for a BLP; if semi'd that denies me (an IP) an opportunity to dispute 'facts'. As I said, let's discusss it on the talk page. Please stop the editing meanwhile. 88.104.24.150 (talk) 23:30, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, XX.150 was not who I was referring to when I mentioned sockpuppetry. Still opposed to full protection as I do not see any edit warring that would necessitate it, but withdrawing my request for semi-pro per XX.150's reasoning. VQuakr (talk) 00:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This request was submitted twice separately.

Temporary semi-protection Long simmering, disputed, controversial BLP with multiple slanderous and libelous edits often done by new accounts, suspected sockpuppets, or random IP addresses. Edward Vielmetti (talk) 20:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It looks like there is at least one IP making positive edits so I'd prefer to leave it unprotected at the moment, since there is also discussion going on. My only other option is to fully protect which I'd rather not do as well. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:07, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection Dynamic IP vandal continually using article series to place their non-sourced predictions for the 2014 show, which aren't out until mid-February. Three weeks should work until the actual nominations come out. Nate • (chatter) 19:51, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kids' Choice Award for Favorite Cartoon has been protected until the 8th, but I don't feel that protection is warranted for the others yet. So Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:10, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:X96lee15 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Banned user Wiki-star's sockpuppets harassing X96lee15 and myself by posting on his talk page. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 18:09, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I do not wish my talk page to be protected. This is the second time Ryulong has requested it. Nobody is harassing me. Please withdraw this request. I will take care of moderating my talk page. — X96lee15 (talk) 19:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No. Your talk page is an epicenter for the activities of a banned user and that means it should be protected, whether or not you feel you are being victimized or not, because I certainly am being victimized by his constant posts there.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:11, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please leave me out of your drama. — X96lee15 (talk) 21:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's a bit late for that considering he keeps going to your user talk page and posting bullshit. It's not going to negatively affect your ability to receive messages. No one contacts you anyway.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ryulong, what part of "it is wrong to request semi-protection of another user's talkpage when they do not want said protection" do you not understand? Ever heard of "don't feed the trolls"? Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:09, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The prevention of edits by a banned user should outweigh one person's misplaced desire to allow disruption to happen.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:13, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ryulong, I cannot take your arguments seriously when you're always swearing. I don't want to have any more interaction with you. Please ignore any posts on my talk page. You're escalating this entire situation. — X96lee15 (talk) 22:15, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, that cannot be done so long as this banned user, who has been banned for nearly 8 years, is still coming back and now using your user talk page as a way to harass other users.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:18, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined This is a case where the interpretation and interaction of the banning policy and protection policy need to be examined. Given that it would be best if this is directed to AN or ANI so that the community can make a judgement. I would also suggest to Ryulong and X96lee15 the edit warring over the issue is not an appropriate way to achieve the goal. Further I was close to fully protecting the page to prevent the war continuing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:52, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated whitewashing removal. Oda Mari (talk) 17:57, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Oda Mari Consider warning the user then if it continues report to WP:AIV or WP:AN3 if it turns into edit warring. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:12, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:05, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Conitnuous addition of false certifications and false charts by IP users. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 05:56, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 18:27, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:49, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:00, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:39, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:34, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:30, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:17, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:13, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:10, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 04:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. —CKY2250 ταικ 02:16, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:30, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Constantly recurring IP vandalism from shifting IP addresses. HGilbert (talk) 02:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User request in own user space - I regenerate the contents of this page with a script, but some IPs don't get it and keep editing it manually. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Snowolf.. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:31, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Can we perhaps get a semi-protection on this BLP? The subject of the article has been mentioned in a news article and the vandals are starting to get to it. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:18, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:32, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. —Lightsout (talk) 22:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection: Content dispute. 88.104.24.150 (talk) 21:38, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. AdmrBoltz 21:42, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection instead of pending changes to match current protection on related article Dan Howell. The ongoing stream of original research and vandalism is similar on both articles. Constructive edits are few and can be handled easily through edit requests. With PC, it's just endless nonsense to deal with. Rivertorch (talk) 21:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC) Added: There have been two more garbage pending edits since I made this request. Rivertorch (talk) 01:07, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – There appears to be a not-so-pretty edit war going on here involving multiple editors. There is a discussion going on, on the talk page, but it doesn't seem to be stopping the back and forth reverts. 24 hours of full protection should help calm things down while the discussion continues. Gloss • talk 20:43, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Persistent BLP vandalism by IP hopper. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs and newbies have repeatedly removed the sourced material. Definite whitewashing. Oda Mari (talk) 18:05, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:53, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions and additions of WP:OR by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 17:35, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection and/or indefinite pending changes: Several IPs adding in credits for actors not in the film, and changing the director to Lou Gehrig. Has been occurring for nearly two weeks. Corvoe (speak to me) 17:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 16:53, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:56, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection:IP vandalism

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:53, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Constant IP vandalism from someone putting in that they own a patent on it. Suggested duration: ~15 days. Thanks. --Pmsyyz (talk) 15:43, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Theparties (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 13:45, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:49, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple IP's continuously insist on moving members of the recurring cast to the main cast. Been a consistent problem all season and for some reason, it's picking up even more now. (examples: [2] [3] [4]) Gloss • talk 18:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference, and how is it vandalism? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The main cast should only consist of the people featured in the opening credits (so in this case, Sarah Paulson, Taissa Farmiga, Frances Conroy, Evan Peters, Lily Rabe, Emma Roberts, Denis O'Hare, Kathy Bates, and Jessica Lange) but other cast members, who appear in almost every episode (Angela Bassett, Gabourey Sidibe) are not technically main cast as they aren't featured in the opener. I've re-worded the note above the main cast clarifying this, we'll see if the issue persists. Corvoe (speak to me) 17:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to have calmed down today. If the issue pops up again I'll go from there but for now this request can be removed. Gloss • talk 00:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn by requestor Mark Arsten (talk) 02:54, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

03 February 2014

Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. This featured article seems to attract the ignorant. Despite the fact that a large the article is devoted to "the difficulty of convincing them of the validity of this identity", the "No it isn't!" posts still come with monotonous regularity. Of the last fifty IP edits, every last one has been reverted. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:29, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected The edits a re sporadic enough that PC should be sufficient; as a point of principle, I really don't like indefinite semi unless there's no other option. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:52, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's always another option, which is to let the gnomes revert the changes as they occur. I would not recommend PC for a page like this, which is not subject to edit warring and BLP violations, as it will not decrease the work of the gnomes, although it will reduce the number of gnomes available, and would prevent bona fide edits. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:04, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 17:35, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:42, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: A new user is removing various images, claiming they are non free, I checked the pics and they are free. Would like the article semied so the newbie comes to the talk page. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I only see one non-autoconfirmed account doing it at this point, probably best to go to WP:AN3 if needed. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:25, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Jim1138 (talk) 19:24, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:47, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. — MusikAnimal talk 19:01, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. AnupMehra ✈ 18:47, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. — MusikAnimal talk 18:29, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:35, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism; at least 2 different IP habitually vandalize the page. 331dot (talk) 17:59, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Monty845 18:13, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full Protection edit warring and content dispute between 4/5 different registered editors on an certain incident at the airport. Took to WT:AIRPORTS and article talk page. Rzxz1980 (talk) 17:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Monty845 18:11, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of unsourced future material by IPs. SummerPhD (talk) 17:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:42, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of unsourced future material by IPs. SummerPhD (talk) 17:31, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:40, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – As per earlier report. Multiple IPs making similar edits on multiple film articles. DonIago (talk) 17:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – multiple IPs performing the same edits on this and other film articles. DonIago (talk) 14:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:22, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Or pending changes. Page was indef semi'd after the end of the PC trial, but pending changes seemed to work. It is a low traffic, low view page. Courtesy ping for @Favonian: protecting sysop. Crazynas t 11:21, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It gets around 900 views a day so pending changes might work depending on how many of them want to test out Wikipedia. But it's up to Favonian. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:22, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I won't get in the way, but I'm not optimistic. Old man Ptolemy is apparently included in school curricula, and that never fails to inspire the inmates. Favonian (talk) 16:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done. We'll see how it goes, and re-protect if necessary. There's no harm in trying, I suppose. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Or pending changes. This page was semi-protected in 2011 for vandalism. It's been a couple years, maybe we could try out pending changes or just unprotecting it to see how it goes?. Crazynas t 10:25, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It gets on average 5000 views a day, so not much chance of unprotection or PC working. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-hopping vandal has been at it since October. Ruby Murray 14:19, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:45, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: While many IP edits have been constructive, a sizable number of edits from them keep changing "Yeager" to "Jaeger" (see talk page and edit notice for details). Hopefully, we can experiment with PC and see if this will discourage this activity. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Since you specifically requested PC rather than semi (which would have been my first instinct). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated deletion of sourced text along with insertion of unsourced content. Auric talk 13:08, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Ymblanter.. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Span (talk) 12:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:27, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection All edits outside of named accounts forming the article's basic skeleton have been IP's self-guessing nominations that won't be announced until mid-month; common pattern with KCA articles. Nate • (chatter) 11:13, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected until 30 March 2014. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:10, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Or unprotect. Page seemed to work at PC during the trial, perhaps we should try again? @HJ Mitchell: as they were the last protecting sysop. . Crazynas t 11:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Around 2500 views a day, worth giving pending changes a go, up to HJ. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs)
Done. I see no harm in giving pending changes a go. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi - maybe until after Feb 14, to fend off fans posting "Valentines" in the article. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:41, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It's just one particular IP, who can be dealt with if they continue. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 05:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Slow editwar. The Banner talk 20:36, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I've warned the user for edit warring, if it continues report to WP:ANEW. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:18, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reduce to Pending Changes. Article is protected indefinitely due to a clear and longstanding history of vandalism. It is my view that the number of edits to this article are low enough that there is no reason that article protection shouldn't or couldn't be dealt with if was downgraded to allow ip's to possibly edit by using pending changes. I would hope admins would be willing to look on this favourably.Blethering Scot 7:18 pm, Today (UTC 0)

Blethering Scot please ask the protecting admin, User:EdJohnston, before making a request here. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: – Over the past year, there is only a single post by an IP to the article talk page, and there have been no {{editsemiprotected}} requests. Since this is on the edge of being a WP:TROUBLES article I'd prefer to leave the semi in place. If another admin wants to make this change I have no objection. EdJohnston (talk) 17:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Using long term semi-protection is not an ideal scenario & it's safe to say the majority of anonymous editors won't have a clue what {{editsemiprotected}} does or about it. The editing numbers on this page were never high and could easily be dealt with by PC, whether it's on the verge of the WP:TROUBLES or not the page will still be protected.Blethering Scot 18:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Given EdJohnston's comment above + the protection history, plus amount of page views it gets I'm not going to unprotect the page at this stage. I have readded the move=autoconfirmed. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:29, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs posting unverified/speculative information. Auric talk 02:42, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Hi, an IP hopping vandal appears to be on a recent campaign to disrupt this article via introduction of original research and section blanking. Requesting a few days of protection against IPs to get us past the flare-up. Thanks!. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:29, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:19, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I need this to be a redirect to Jesus to be an example redirect over at WP:Article titles. This is salted for reasons I'm unsure of (there was a brief RFD five years ago), but the proposed redirect doesn't fail any of the current criteria at WP:R for deletion. Red Slash 01:16, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Red Slash first point of call is the admin who closed the discussion and salted the page, User:Ruslik0. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:29, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Already unprotected by administrator Ruslik0. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:31, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Cascading protection was left over after a move. Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:48, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template – I'd like to be able to add a parameter that will allow for a &limit= to be specified. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 23:04, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done SlimVirgin (talk) 05:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 18:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done SlimVirgin (talk) 05:16, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Almost all recent IP edits are unhelpful. Jinkinson talk to me 23:12, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 03:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 22:53, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 02:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – From what I can see in the History it is constantly being Vandalised however not at a frequent stage it should still be put under temporary protection. MikeTheEditor104 (talk) 16:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:35, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Inclusion of info from unreliable sources. (Just began looking at the page, and just by looking at the history, this page has a problem with IPs just adding news from fan sites/forums.). Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated. gsk 17:44, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Only created twice, and no AfDs, I don't think it justifies protection yet. Monty845 19:21, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Ip user continues to edit based on fan purposes instead of encyclopedic . LADY LOTUS • TALK 13:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I think WP:AN3 would be a better venue since it's only one IP for now. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:31, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

04 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Per last page lock, this will increase with the election in May. Can we put it on lock for 3 months?Lihaas (talk) 08:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Let's what and see what happens. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Its not preemptive. There IS still vandalism and reverting of IPs going on.
and already in a new hours a new one.Lihaas (talk) 15:58, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism by anon IPs and new users. STATic message me! 22:27, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: or pending changes. Page is very low traffic, protected in 2011 for vandalism. Try unprotecting? Or if there is still need, pending changes should be more than sufficient. @Anthony Appleyard:. Crazynas t 10:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected per discussion above. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: @Anthony Appleyard: or if another sysop feels comfortable responding. This page has low enough editing and pageviews that either trying unprotection, or lowering to pending changes seems appropriate. Crazynas t 10:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected per discussion above. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:03, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: The annual spamfest is beginning. Protect until Feb 15th?. NeilN talk to me 16:35, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 17:54, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous unexplained removal of content, or additions of original research. Page had pending changes protection but it eventually disappeared. Article gets a large amount of views plus the show is popular so that also doesn't help with the vandals. – Recollected • 16:14, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:29, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The subject has recently became CEO of microsoft. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 14:48, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:27, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – There's been a lot of edit-warring here, with tons of uncommunicative IPs supporting a couple of registered SPAs. It would be easier on everyone if the IPs were taken out of the equation for a little while. See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/1houstonian. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:29, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 17:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Seems to be attracting too many vandals. Can we protect it? It's history has many protections. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 12:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 17:45, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 12:45, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 17:40, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The article has been repeatedly edited in a disruptive manner by a relative of the subject. Originally registered as B de2002 (talk · contribs), then as Bikramjit De (talk · contribs), they have used a vast number of IP addresses and have demonstrated a consistent WP:CIR problem. There is some discussion involving them at Talk:Barun De and a lot more on various user talk pages, including those of myself, of Qwyrxian (talk · contribs) and RegentsPark (talk · contribs). Ordinarily, I'd ask one of those two admins to semi because they are up to speed with the many problems but, alas, neither is currently active. I see no other way to stop this disruption other than semi-protection - I don't think a range block will work. Sitush (talk) 12:35, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:42, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Majority of edits to this article have been from IP's adding made up latin names. Fraggle81 (talk) 12:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's infrequent blips every year from a university subnet so guessing it's a suggested link by a professor given the timings, PC might be good enough. tutterMouse (talk) 12:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection repeated removal of relevant referenced information by the same new editors (TylerSparks & ROSECAPE). Multiple editors have tried to contact the offending editors (suspected sock puppets) to welcome them to Wikipedia and clarify their problem with the text. No response is ever given and often welcome text is also removed from their user pages. Article was placed in semi-protect on the 23rd January 2014, this unfortunately has not deterred repeated vandalism.--Discott (talk) 11:07, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. If another account take over either report to WP:SPI or let me know (on my talk page) and I'll have a look. Regards, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:27, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – In the past month, sudden spike in editing a specific area of this article by new users. There seems to have been a content dispute, recently two newly registered users removed the very same thing. Protection to deter this possible sockpuppetry, and convince them to take it to the talk page. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:27, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined At this stage pending a result to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Voiceoftamil, my only option to full protect or block them all so I'd rather wait and see. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:16, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Seems to be increasing IP vandalism to a featured article as Sochi 2014 approaches; as the visibility of the page increases (as the Olympics approach) perhaps it would be prudent to have edits to the page be subject to review... Cogito-Ergo-Sum (14) (talk) 02:45, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Pages are not protected pre-emptively so I'd like to wait a few days/weeks and see what happens. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:51, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Non-notable, recreated several times by Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Katrina Villegas. Ruby Murray 10:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:04, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Seems to have been having some recent vandalism along with some about a month ago or two, I suggest about a week of semi-protection to be applied to give the page a bit of a break. MikeTheEditor104 (talk) 10:47, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:18, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Lot of IP make edits against given source on section "results by matchday". I can give diffs and link to consensus for this table if necessary. 2013–14 Manchester City F.C. season got semi-protected for 10 days recently for the same reason. QED237 (talk) 22:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:40, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP vandalism since January 2014. *SGR* (talk) 10:32, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection: Persistent vandalism. AnupMehra ✈ 08:20, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at edit history, support the lock.Lihaas (talk) 08:25, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. FYI HJ Mitchell given the high edit rate I've semi'd it for a few days. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:58, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent edit warring/edits not backed up by sources by single user with multiple IPs. The 28 Dec 2013–29 Jan 2014 hiatus in edit warring was due to temporary semi-protection after the user's sockpuppet investigation. Suggestion for protection came from discussion at AN/I -Uyvsdi (talk) 01:48, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:49, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP users continue to revert edits that shouldnt be reverted. Probably some fan that doesnt want to admit that he has a gf. LADY LOTUS • TALK 00:53, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection again. The Fleetic spammer is back again. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected —Tom Morris (talk) 02:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Edit rate is too high for PC. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 23:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Protection expired, undiscussed changes by IPs started up again. NeilN talk to me 18:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:18, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection for this page because of edit warring. Several content disputes have developed and three other editors possibly in violation of the 3 revert policy received warnings, after which I started discussion sections on the areas of dispute. Instead of discussing, more reverts were made. I have restored the page to the pre-revert state and would like protection so that we have a chance to discuss the differences of opinion. --Ring Cinema (talk) 18:35, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, at this point there's a little less edit warring than I like to see when full protecting. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There's been a lot of disruptive editing by IP users; making their personal comments (jokes actually) on article topic. Please protect it so that autoconfirmed users may edit it. UBStalk 18:50, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:40, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 18:25, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:33, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Suggest 3 months of Level 1 PC. Article is being vandalised often. EthicallyYours! 12:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Frequently vandalized page with recent vandal activity. . EthicallyYours! 12:12, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – One of Wikipedia's most vandalized pages, with multiple vandal activity in recent times. . EthicallyYours! 12:10, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Or revert it back to pending changes (which is where it was before the trial ended in 2011). Low traffic page which doesn't need semi-protection. Crazynas t 10:54, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. It gets more than 4000 views everyday so my level for unprotection is pretty low. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:17, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Or just unprotect. Page was indef semi'd after the PC trial ended in 2011. Still seems like an ideal candidate for PC. Crazynas t 10:50, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:18, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

05 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – page has been vandalized several times in the past few days. K6ka (talk | contribs) 19:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected and not for the first time. Favonian (talk) 19:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandal magnet, currently extremely vulnerable to it, and a highly-visible page. Start with Pending Changes, see if we need to go up from that. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indef. semi. It seems that every time this comes off protection, low-grade but chronic edit-warring starts up again. It's always the same thing, IP's changing the name w/o refs or discussion. — kwami (talk) 21:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:28, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Herald talk with me 15:47, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Request PC; IP users either vandalising article or inserting incorrect information. EthicallyYours! 15:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Anonymous IP consistently deleting sourced material. The vandal also adds a section that contains anti-semitic remarks. Perfect Orange Sphere (talk) 02:55, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged "anti-semitic remarks" by itself is not grounds for protection, if sourced. We do not WP:CENSOR. That said, if deemed vandalism then, yes, it should be locked.Lihaas (talk) 08:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The main issue is the deletion of content Perfect Orange Sphere (talk) 18:09, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:07, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: The most successful e-commerce website in India (Not POV, check with refs), Flipkart's page is being vandalised frequently. Requesting Pending-changes. EthicallyYours! 15:22, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:00, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – ~10 vandalizing edits in the past three days. Dwpaul Talk 05:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism from 77.69.1.* - many warnings given, persistent for months, possible COI from company wanting to remove content they don't like Imavra (talk) 16:23, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Maybe consider an IP range block? EthicallyYours! 16:30, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This page appears to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot I NotifyOnline 16:46, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator Nick.. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Pinethicket (talk) 15:28, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Hugely visible page with the revision history filling up with reverting drive-by vandalism. Sportfan5000 (talk) 16:07, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:31, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistently vandalized. EthicallyYours! 16:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 16:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IP vandalism. The main IP is registered to a library in Australia and someone there seems to have a bit of a grudge against this article (about a group of Australian professional wrestlers). The IP is removing sourced material and seems to think that "it's not in English" is a good argument for the removals. The group the article is about is based in Japan, so it makes sense that some of the sources are in Japanese. I could go for a 3RR violation on the IP, but since it's registered to a library, there may be a problem there.リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen) (talk) 03:06, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Nominator refuses to provide valid sources to prove case and should be reverted until proper sources given - if they exist. 203.17.215.26 (talk) 03:27, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User(s) blocked. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:34, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. George Ho (talk) 08:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'd rather semi it to stop the BLP vios then use PC and still have them in the page history. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:49, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated changing of a sourced caste name by anons. I did open a talk page discussion but nothing is happening there. Sitush (talk) 08:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:27, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by Malaysian IP hopper. Areaseven (talk) 18:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 08:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection. Jguard18 Critique Me 08:07, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected indefinitely. (edit protection only). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi- or Template-protection: High risk template. (used in {{talk header}} and {{archives}} amongst others). –Quiddity (talk) 03:23, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi - the article has historically been the object of ethnic POV editing, claiming the subject's ethnicity; the rest state of the article is a clear and sourced statement of his complex background accompanied by a hidden comment explaining; IPs (probably a single editor) had returned to disruptive editing, so some period of temp semi would be helpful and appropriate. BMK (talk) 19:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:45, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Edits by IPs and unconfirmed aren't good lately. George Ho (talk) 05:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 06:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. a couple days ago. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by Malaysian IP-hopper. Areaseven (talk) 05:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:40, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism from IP:72.214.164.94. Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 03:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:58, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template – per protection on Template:Connected contributor. Widefox; talk 23:25, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While the template it redirects to has a sizable number of transclusions, the redirect itself only has 3. I don't see why we should treat the redirect as if it inherits the visibility of the target. Monty845 23:32, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, (for the bot) Mark Arsten (talk) 01:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Pending changes: I'm normally very adamantly against protection, but this article feels like a magnet for vandals. I've counted 11 instances of (bad-faith) vandalism in the last month alone, from both IP users and registered users, and it continues backwards. January had a lot of IP vandals, but we've had at least 3 or 4 registered users vandalize during December–January.

[soapbox comment]: If you find semi-protected appropriate due to all the anons, consider an expiration time for this article. I feel like Wiki is trending towards lockdown of all the articles. meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 04:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:53, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions and vandalism by anon IP editors to a BLP. STATic message me! 02:52, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:56, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Dubious unsourced additions and vandalism by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 02:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:54, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism and also some level of new account vandalism. Marchoctober (talk) 01:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to get approval from User:Fuzheado before getting this protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:35, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This page appears to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot I NotifyOnline 03:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected by administrator Fuzheado. (3 days) Armbrust The Homunculus 04:06, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of disruptive editing and vandalism by anon IPs new users. BattleshipMan (talk) 19:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:55, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Constant removal of content. Please see revision history and talk page. Afro-Eurasian (talk) 23:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full/upload protection - (Excuse if I don't know what to call it) Registered user is repeatedly uploading personal artwork over official poster. Alaney2k (talk) 23:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Upload protected for one week. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:40, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated insertion of non notable redlink name to list of people with the surname Taliaferro. Jevansen (talk) 22:43, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: emerging edit war with an editor who refuses any form of discussion. Borsoka (talk) 21:30, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:52, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – It was indefinitely semi protected before the full protection and now that the full protection is over, the page is being attacked by BLP vandalism by anon IP editors, like would be expected. STATic message me! 23:43, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Paul Erik.. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:37, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP refusing t except consensus, as can be seen in one of his edit summaries. Murry1975 (talk) 18:03, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. There is only one IP. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 14:58, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Article was not protected to begin with. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:32, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – for unsourced info and/or Vandalism about disney shows. Digifan23 (talk) 22:18, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. StringTheory11 (t • c) 21:40, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:23, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 21:14, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

06 February 2014

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. --Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 20:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:16, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Lukeno94 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An IP editor just doesn't get that I don't want them to post at my talk page right now. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 20:41, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, the above user has removed a tag on a page and he needs to discuss it on the talk page and explain himself. Actions are needed in order to prevent his activity which amounts to vandalism if he doesn't discuss it. If he is disengaging he should just say so instead of removing the comment. My actions are wholly reasonable in the circumstances. I've made my last edit on his page anyway. Recommend no action. 58.165.7.185 (talk) 20:46, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of one day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:46, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – The last good edit by IP was October 2013; other edits thereafter are bad. George Ho (talk) 08:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:05, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article has been subject of persistent vandalism and sockpuppetry. One version of the IP received a ban last week but other versions of the same person persist in vandalism and do not engage in any dialogue. Egghead06 (talk) 18:45, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:20, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Would also request that two large blanking edits by 207.75.194.10 be scrubbed from the log as they are personal attacks. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:38, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism by anon IP editors to a BLP. STATic message me! 18:37, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full-protection: dispute. Frietjes (talk) 18:31, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:35, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edit warring by IP hopping editor, evading block following level 4 warning at User_talk:64.9.130.175. Ruby Murray 13:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Jpgordon.. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:29, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – non-notable youngster. Ruby Murray 13:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected by Anna Frodesiak (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 16:27, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Span (talk) 12:30, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:42, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – The conflict between two Germanys has been over, but this article is still at war with vandals. George Ho (talk) 07:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:58, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism.Binu jayakrishnan (talk) 06:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC) 11:55 06-February-2014[reply]

User(s) blocked. — Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:55, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Jingiby (talk) 12:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:25, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consist an vandalism . Jguard18 Critique Me 10:38, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:30, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Redirect changed twice into a duplication article, so protection is required to prevent this. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It might be a bit more complicated than this. See my note at Talk:Jawan Singh Solanki - there is an unfortunate tendency for caste POV pushers to ascribe a caste origin to various individuals despite the lack of verifiability. Doing so is, of course, a violation of BLP. - Sitush (talk) 08:37, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:39, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent vandalism . Jguard18 Critique Me 10:38, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: page is again being vandalised by unknown IP addresses. The page was put on temporary semi-protect on the 23rd January and a user who was persitently removing referenced relevant content was temporary blocked on the 4th February. Neither of these actions have so far stopped persistent vandalism of the page.--Discott (talk) 10:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked.. Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:17, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite move protection: Highly visible page – Seen in Portal:Current events; highly-edited. George Ho (talk) 08:07, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:02, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. SFK2 (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 23:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:45, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – I've started the RFC for the disputed content, if not dubious. I still think that further protection is need, even when there is no violation of 3RR... yet. George Ho (talk) 22:56, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, a little less edit warring than I like to see when full protecting Mark Arsten (talk) 05:44, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – full page protection just expired. dispute ongoing at ArbCom, probably better to leave it locked until arbcom rules. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Unless Arbcom would like this to be protected, I'm not inclined to reprotect here since there hasn't been disruption since the protection expired. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 05:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:58, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 05:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:56, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A mere five days after a 3 month page protection on this article expired, IP 108.15.16.111 dove in and started a campaign to vandalize all dates. Article seems to be a frequent target for vandalism and page protection should be activated again, and maybe for a longer period, since IPs are lurking in the dark waiting for protection to expire. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:47, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: A discussion regarding a lawsuit of a BLP is taking place on the talk page, but IPs are adding the content back through off Wiki canvassing. Bahooka (talk) 05:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:41, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Mark Arsten: You might want to consider Temporary full protection now that an autoconfirmed user has joined in the edit war. ~Adjwilley (talk) 05:57, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The PC doesn't seem to be hindering much of the vandalism going on this month; every edit since the protection has been vandalism/reverting. ZappaOMati 01:13, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:49, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by user with multiple IP addresses. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 01:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:48, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. . Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 19:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:43, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:07, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Until the multiple content disputes (I believe 4; at least 3) have been resolved. Discussion is getting heated and page revisions are getting thrown around along with reverting and adding content that is still trying to gain consensus (posting the proposal on the talk then adding content without consensus).

HLachman and Ladislav Mecir are the major parties in most of the disputes; they are constantly accusing one another of unconstructive editing (which is true in at least one case) along with not following the consensus - building process amongst other things. --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 20:07, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I'm not sure I see the need for full protection at this point. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:06, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected Page is a redirect: This page has been edited with relevant information but instead some user keeps redirecting the page. DrexMafia (talk) 20:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, This section for specific requests for edits to protected pages. Please discuss the matter with the users who a redirecting the page. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism by anon IP editors immediately following the end of recent protection period. STATic message me! 01:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:04, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Full protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked – Abuse of talk page of a sock. Werieth (talk) 19:55, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 19:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, PC seems to be working Ok. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:00, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-protection: High risk page. Massive violation of WP:OWN. Removal of sourced content. Unregistered users keep adding unsourced content or removing sourced ones. Editors's impartiality should be questioned too.KazekageTR (talk) 06:25, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:58, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Herald talk with me 10:35, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:16, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:36, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. until July 2014. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Insane amounts of vandalism in last hour. czar ♔ 21:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the last good version is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sonic_Boom_%282014_video_game%29&oldid=594424270. ubiquity (talk) 21:36, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Wow, that was some heavy vandalism. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:41, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of image with inadequate copyright information. SMS Talk 19:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 19:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally uncovered socks related to this and notified master here.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 19:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Some IP vandal is constantly forging statistics in the infobox:[5][6]. Oleola (talk) 15:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I only see a couple reverts in the past month. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Partial unprotection: Currently both semi-protected and PC/1. I don't think policy actually supports having both active at once (and I also don't see the point), so please remove at least one of them. I know I'm supposed to contact the protecting admin first, but which one should I contact? NYKevin 03:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you ask @Berean Hunter:. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've never seen where policy disallows concurrent use. Could you please link to any such reference. Also, you have the ability to edit that article and nothing is halting you. Note that the semi-protection is due to expire in two days.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 13:33, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is absolutely no point to having both at once. The people who PC/1 would affect are unable to edit the page anyway. Thus the current state of affairs is exactly equivalent to just having semi-protection. This table does not list the combination of semi-protection and PC/1, so I submit that policy does not allow it. --NYKevin 14:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Autoconfirmed and confirmed users may both currently edit the article according to that chart...that was my desired intent. Both forms of protection are routinely applied together and your assertion that it isn't in the scope of policy is in error. PC1 will give lasting protection after the semi-protection expires.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 15:06, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Mark Arsten (talk) 17:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated IP nonsensical edits against known info; initial from one IP address now expanding to two. Spshu (talk) 18:35, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 3 months by Berean Hunter (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 19:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated IP nonsensical edits against sources; initial from one IP address now expanding to two. Spshu (talk) 18:35, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi protected indefinitely. If you want it lifted at any point, just ask.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 19:19, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected (for the bot) Mark Arsten (talk) 19:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – 100% of edits in past month are vandalistic or cleanup of same. Please protect for a meaningful duration: 30 days suggested. Thank you. Hertz1888 (talk) 18:13, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 19:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism by user with multiple IP addresses. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 18:50, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 18:57, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. NeilN talk to me 15:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous IP cruft and changing sales and certifications of this GA article. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 15:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – BLP violation including removal of sourced materials by ip editors. Darkesthoursoflife († • ©) 15:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:27, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request semi-protection for 10 days Article had been protected for three days last week. Since the protection ended, there have been a number of vandalism or inaccurate edits. Request it be semi-protected until after the game pbp 15:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Well, indefinite may be a bit much. Protection requested because an IP editor keeps adding an enormous amount of detail about these certification programs sourced to the company website. These edits should be seen as promotional, in my opinion. Drmies (talk) 14:00, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. QED237 (talk) 14:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:42, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Not actually persistent yet, but based on last night's flurry of vandalism, this edit from the same user is probably just the beginning. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Nowhere near protection levels yet. GedUK  13:39, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – edits from various IP addresses blanking sourced material. Elias Z 12:10, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, Erm, unless I'm reading it wrong, what they're taking out is, bar one paragraph, unsourced. You keep putting it back in. GedUK  13:32, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editor removing relevant category. 

Binksternet (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Semi-protected for a period of X, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. Bink, that IP is all over the map--actually, not literally: they geolocate to Lima. Isn't there some known IP hopper out there, a longterm vandal/disruptor? I remember a case from maybe a few months ago. Anyway, check the various IPs and their contributions and you'll find a lot more. Some of their work is actually OK (gnomish work: alphabetizing, capitalization), but these category changes of course are not. Look into it and see if you want to ask someone to see if a range block is possible. Drmies (talk) 17:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Zolpidem (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: Edit war with IP user. Challenging to discuss with IP user. Testem (talk) 09:52, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It's one user; please consider the edit-warring noticeboard. I'll leave a warning all the same. m.o.p 13:12, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template – To process edit request. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 13:14, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Icon is set as a div by MediaWiki software, not by that template. m.o.p 13:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Herald talk with me 12:29, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-hopper adding a load of non-relevant stuff and edit warring when it is removed . The Banner talk 09:59, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:25, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Content dispute, possible BLP violations (unsourced allegations/claims). High level of IP vandalism. WPPilot 04:50, 7 February 2014 (UTC)(talk)

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 16:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Unexplained changes in genre.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 20:36, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection., They aren't unexplained, someone has even provided a source. Now, the source may not be reliable, but you can't say it's vandalism. Since that source came (and went), the genre's only been changed once. GedUK  12:51, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Herald talk with me 13:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 08:07, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. George Ho (talk) 04:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Dougweller.. GedUK  13:15, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated copyright violation insertions by IP editor(s) from multiple addresses. Page has been semi-protected in the past due to the same problem. Copyright violation clearly discussed on the talk page. Dendrite1 (talk) 03:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Vandalism by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 07:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. m.o.p 13:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Dr.K. (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Inbound attacks by vandal troll socks of troll vandal Vgleer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 07:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. m.o.p 13:02, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – edit warring over BLP newly in the news. Admin might want to consider checking for WP:WRONGVERSION due to possible BLP violations (some unsourced allegations/claims). Gaijin42 (talk) 01:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:01, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism by IPs. Span (talk) 01:14, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.
Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 00:54, 7 February 2014 (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 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:06, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Requesting long-term block. Article is a habitual site for gibberish sockpuppet vandal, AllenComedian1999. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:46, 6 February 2014 (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 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:32, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism along with dubious unsourced additions and WP:OR. STATic message me! 06:50, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. m.o.p 07:06, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Attack of the SHOUTING IP's... a day or two of semi should be enough please. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:29, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Last good IP edit was... like, a long, long time ago? There aren't good ones lately. George Ho (talk) 20:59, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:04, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – No good IP edits. Jamesx12345 20:47, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:08, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:32, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: It was protected due to a proxy edit-war. Let's see if it is safe now. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 20:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined per the highlighted comment above please contact the admin who instituted the semi-protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:03, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Protecting admin has not edited since early Tuesday morning New York time. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 00:57, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:56, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: New page for disambiguation from Al Gore which is indefinitely semi-protected due to a long history of excessive vandalism. Requesting proactive extension of same protection to the dab page. Ivanvector (talk) 20:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:48, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High potential for vandalism. The current Google doodle searches for "Olympic Charter", and the Wikipedia entry is in the top 5 results. IP vandalism is already beginning to occur. Recommending semi-protection until the Google doodle no longer searches for "Olympic Charter". — OranL (talk) 00:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. (semi 1 day). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP users are continuously disruptive editing and reverting edits and adding in information not sourced. LADY LOTUS • TALK 21:33, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 10:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

08 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 03:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, PC seems to be handling it Ok in my mind. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – There are constant reverts done by two users, one on IP address and the other Illegitimate Barrister, who are continually undoing edits. Propose protecting the page until the edit warring is resolved. KJ click here 16:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: : Thank you very much for the temporary block, Mr. Arsten, although I am pretty sure that once it expires, the I.P. vandal will be back to his same antics. I do believe that an indefinite block and full protection of said article are wholly called for here. Best regards, Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 16:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT: Sure enough, he comes back using a proxy. Newly-created sockpuppet: 121.92.211.190. Regards, Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 16:58, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – heavy and continuous edits from unregistered users (IP addresses) usually on the Cast and Characters section that can also be considered as edit warring. Polmags (talk) 18:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question: The presence of IP editors alone does not justify protection. Do you have any diffs showing edit warring? m.o.p 12:42, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most of the edits from here to here that were done by several IP editors on the Cast and Characters section are usually about, but not limited to (1) changing or making fun of the actor names and the characters they portray; (2) removing of the actor names that were previously part of the show's earlier episodes; (3) changing the order of the listed cast from the original alphabeticalized or as appeared in the show's opening/ending credits; (4) moving the actor names on different classifications. As specific example, when the actor Liza Soberano was added in the show, this IP editor moved her under Main Cast in this diff here and added her name here despite that she is billed as "Also Starring" on the show's opening credits. I have reverted that edit here and here but another IP editor recently change it again here. Polmags (talk) 19:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The level of disruption is a little bit less than I like to see when protecting, feel free to re-report if disruption continues. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:56, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question: How should the level of disruption be? Could you please give a specific description? Based on the page's history, almost everyday there is an unregistered user that is making an edit. I am thinking that if it is a registered user, at least, I can communicate with them on thier Talk page. Polmags (talk) 22:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I like to see several reverts within the past week at least before protecting. Also, you can communicate with unregistered users by posting on their talk pages, as well. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:33, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistant content modifying and reverting by user pushing an agenda, user threatened to keep editing article through proxy-ip's if they are banned. So also request semi-protection after temporary full protection. Lazyfoxx (talk) 03:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent addition of copyrighted content by IP editors. SMS Talk 22:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I only see a couple reverts in the past few months Mark Arsten (talk) 01:41, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistant content disputes by autoconfirmed users since January 28. XXX8906 (talk) 22:48, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, there's a little less disruption than I like to see when full protecting. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism over the past month. PM800 (talk) 00:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 23:57, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Snowolf .. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There has been vandalism on which team gets to have the most championships: FIBA are unclear, but it's certainly not a team which is named "Serbia"; it's either Yugoslavia or the US. –HTD 23:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:45, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Never before have I seen so much vandalism done to an article in such a short space of time. Launchballer 22:37, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Materialscientist.. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:37, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: Disruptve editing won't stop since the beginning of the year. FonEengIneeR7 talk 22:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:36, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:58, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:34, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Explained blanking by a IP hopper. STATic message me! 17:58, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I only see a couple reverts in the past week. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:39, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Appears to be an edit war over the title of the next airing episode due to conflicting sources. Jnorton7558 (talk) 17:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually the problem has been a new user adding the same copyvio 3 times despite warnings, and another bordeline copyvio, along with the addition of some unsourced episodes and then adding the episodes again sourced to a fansite. The problem is well under control. The name of the next episode has just been something that has been caught up getting rid of the inappropriate content. --AussieLegend (✉) 19:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, it looks like this might be better handled by seeking sanctions against the problematic user. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:10, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: AnonIP, probably sock, keeps reverting to year old POV version despite several editors working to make it NPOV. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 14:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I only see a couple reverts in the past month. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In less than 24 hours the same Anon IP did a full revert to a year old version with nasty comments in the diff. I'll start a talk page thread and see what happens. Just remembered! why I so quickly assumed vandalism and double reverted: last year a long-term sock was issuing threats vs. editors and reverting dozens of inappropriate category removals. Hopefully it's not him and won't have to try again. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 18:48, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Highly visible. Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 11:07, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined No previous instances of vandalism, only transcluded on 550 pages. m.o.p 13:27, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I protected this as you were declining it. I've removed protection again. GedUK  13:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Master of Puppets: It is enough. --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 18:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Highly frequented site being changed frequently as new candidates register. Folks are editing the page with linkedin and facebook "sources". Potential for WP:SOAP and WP:COI from actual candidates/campaign managers. Hot election category because of the involvement of controversial incumbent Rob Ford. And his controversy here: Timeline of Rob Ford video scandal. CaffeinAddict (talk) 20:54, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It's not that bad at this stage. I'm sure it'll get worse, but we don't protect pre-emptively. GedUK  12:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There has been more activity today. CaffeinAddict (talk) 18:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

09 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There is what seems to be an army of sockpuppets messing with this obscure page, including a bunch of IPs. There's an SPI here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mg3942 but right now the IPs are making conversation impossible as they revert before anyone can even gather quotes to start talk page discussions. Probably just a day or two of semi would give us a little break to get talk page discussions going. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Added PC1 to thwart sock efforts.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 15:09, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

semi protection - disruptive IPs. (note one of the edit summaries should be suppressed as well) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:23, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Additionally, I have emailed the Oversight team concerning the edit summary.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 13:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:57, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – As soon as previous 2 week protection expired there has been an immediate resumption of IPs adding vast tracts of un-encyclopaedic and unsourced information (possibly auto-biographical?).  Velella  Velella Talk   10:10, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Also added PC1 to flag revisions for review.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 15:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:SodaStream (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated personal attacks against editors. GabrielF (talk) 09:24, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. GedUK  13:13, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. I am One of Many (talk) 06:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. m.o.p 07:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. JDDJS (talk) 04:29, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, only two reverts in the past week, which is a bit less than I like to see when protecting. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Yankees-fan removing a Tampa Bay rays player as not notable... The Banner talk 22:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I suggest taking the issue to WP:AN3 instead. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:46, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-Protection: Persistant Vandalism. Yoshi24517Chat Absent 03:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Users are arguing about whether if she is an actress or not. IPadPerson (talk) 21:01, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I don't see enough edit warring to justify full protection at this point. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:41, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Persistent addition of spam external links. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:34, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent disruptive editing, from one person but across multiple IPs. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Persistent but infrequent vandalism going back to September 2005. . Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 15:54, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 19:03, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - I'm seeing little to no disruptive editing there. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism. NickSt (talk) 11:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection - Potential for a very nonsensical edit war to develop with no intention of engaging in discussion, being shown by one party who is discussing through edit summaries instead.. Please fully protect to force discussion of the editing and content as opposed to discussing through edit summaries as a discussion has been started but is being ignored. Sport and politics (talk) 10:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, there's a little less revert warring at this point than I like to see when protecting. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:United States presidential election in Vermont, 1964 (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP seems highly knowledgeable about many aspects of Wikipedia but unwilling to understand basic policy. He has reproduced the same text over and over for each New England state, New York and others. I suspect that blocking unregistered users will simply force him to register, which isn't a bad outcome in itself. Maybe I can get some outside commentary in the meantime.

Suggest two weeks. If successful here, I will request temporary block on the other articles as well. Student7 (talk) 01:55, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Student7: Did you request the correct page here? I don't see any IP edits on this talk page. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:Inqvisitor has answered my discussions at great length at Talk:United States presidential election in Vermont, 1964. For the record, I am equal opportunity. Having similar trouble with United States presidential election in Maine, 1984, but with opposite partisanship! Dozens of those as well. Will have to be handled differently. Editor is registered and quite knowledgeable. If I can't handle this one, I'll have to give up on 1984. Student7 (talk) 16:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, as the editor in question is auto-confirmed, semi-protection would be no help here. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Nearly all edits since the last semi-protect in November have been vandalism or vandalism reversion from various 'fantasy TV lineup' IP's. Nate • (chatter) 03:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP being vandalized by multiple IPs. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 02:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Persistent but infrequent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 01:58, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 03:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism after previous semi-protection expired. —Josh3580talk/hist 01:57, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:17, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. VQuakr (talk) 23:15, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:50, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 22:30, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 22:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – After PC protection expired, vandals keep coming back. George Ho (talk) 20:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 19:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 00:37, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recently protected and now lot of IP disruption again. QED237 (talk) 18:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:36, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: recent upswing in vandalism in the last few days, including insertion of unsourced claims of death. NiciVampireHeart 16:17, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protection Four times deleted (A7/BLP) and every time re-created by two different SPAs in the last 12 months. --Ben Ben (talk) 13:41, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:28, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:86.134.167.249 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 19:44, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator JamesBWatson.. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:17, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Has become a target for IP vandals in the wake of his death today. fuzzy510 (talk) 10:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:24, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism from several IP users who seem to be working together . Sjö (talk) 08:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Extended semi-protection: IP mess has resumed and no concerns at talk. Brandmeistertalk 07:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One week semi-protection - IP editor continues to readd poorly sourced negative material in violation of WP:BLP, has not participated in talk page discussion. Daniel (talk) 07:34, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 00:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war, anonymous users arbitrarily edit the item persistently. Jaam0121 (talk) 19:34, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. JimVC3 (talk) 23:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:50, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: A lot of IPs tried to add the falsity to the article that this person would be dead. Yoda1893 (talk) 23:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi protection: persistent vandalism by one user from different IP addresses. W. P. Uzer (talk) 21:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done by Courcelles. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 19:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done by JamesBWatson. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:05, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Page has a persistant history of vandalism. A scroll through the history will show this. Gloss • talk 06:53, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

10 February 2014

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism on a political and always-changing topic. It was semi-protected for a short time, which was great and it needs to be protected again. PrairieKid (talk) 20:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – Vandalism and BLP policy violations have been happening within a gap of few days over the past several months. -TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:43, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Additions of WP:OR and WP:GWAR by anon IP editors and new users. STATic message me! 19:51, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:17, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:44, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@CambridgeBayWeather: Yes there has been. Article blanking, unexplained removal, vandalism, BLP vandalism and addition of WP:OR, and that is by all different people in just the last two days. STATic message me! 15:53, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:24, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:38, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions to a BLP. STATic message me! 17:11, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PC1 for 90 days: Slow-motion ongoing insertion of material that is contradicted by existing sources, without supplying a better source. There are BLP implications. PC1 will ensure that non-logged-in editors don't see such edits as they will presumably be rejected. The WP:DENY effect will hopefully cause such editors to get bored and move on. See article talk page and history for more details. There are "less than 30" editors watchlisting this article now. Disregard this request or remove PC1 when this number goes up enough that all edits will be seen by a watchlister within several hours. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. GZWDer (talk) 16:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 16:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations – Article about a high-profile, recently-paroled detainee that has been attracting quite a few unsourced or controversial anonymous edits over the last few days. This seems like a prime candidate for some kind of PC protection. SuperMarioMan 13:49, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Shirt58.. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

long term semi protection IPs from the sock master have returned with the expiration of the previous protection. see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mealwaysrockz007/Archive -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:02, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:47, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: vandalism and frequent edits with derogatory remarks and section blanking.Rima.sharma (talk) 09:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. No edits at all since the previous protection expired. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 12:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism. 36.83.124.62 (talk) 08:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There have only been two edits this month and neither of those were vandalism. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 12:11, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lock for IPs for some time continuous vandalism --Milićević (talk) 13:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:43, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Gif-unrelated talk! 03:43, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Drmies (talk) 05:15, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 03:34, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:38, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandalism is rampant. Requesting either protection limited to autoconfirmed editors, or requiring that IP edits be reviewed before being submitted. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:21, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 03:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 03:10, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 03:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Articles related to the children's animated show, The Amazing World of Gumball are attractive targets for persistent vandals because of the popularity of the series. This article is being attacked with date vandalism, and has been a frequent target of numerical vandalism for a long time, primarily from IPs. Requesting long-term protection. Thanks. . Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:05, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:12, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article is vandalized on an on-going basis. It is a frequent target of date vandalism from IPs, mostly, though there are sock operators who vandalize as well. Requesting long-term block from non-Autoconfirmed users and IPs. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:10, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: A template that doesn't need to be edited at all, prefer to play it safe with a semi-protection to avoid potential future issues. Gloss • talk 06:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, unless I'm mistaken, it doesn't seem to be very highly transcluded. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:25, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request un-protection as few users doing syndicate editing for OMICS Group page. Probably they are paid editors to other competitive open access publishers.Lizia7 (talk) 17:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep -- and you're one of them. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, please discuss the issue on the talk page. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 06:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:49, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Many IP's are adding in details of the setlist for this concert since it kicked off yesterday. All of these additions have been unsourced made the page very messy. Gloss • talk 05:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:46, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Additions of WP:OR and WP:GWAR by anon IP editors and new users. STATic message me! 19:51, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:17, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:44, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 15:55, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:51, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 23:41, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 17:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:43, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Requesting immediate archiving...

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Edit war over album sales--change from 35 to 50 million by some IP. Also vandalism throughout page. CrowzRSA 15:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: No BLP violations in three months. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 19:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Please consult with @Bagumba, the protecting admin, first. Mike V • Talk 23:50, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Large majority of edits on this page continues to be IP vandalism/hoaxing/self-promotion and reversions of same by bots and registered editors. Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 02:46, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template – Vandalism of z-indexed images on an issue tag that would be difficult to find and revert (I had to use the web developer console). — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 01:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Additions of unsourced content, speculation and original research. STATic message me! 01:24, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated IP vandalism after registered vandal was blocked. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 01:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article is being vandalized by IPs. Requesting temporary protection from IPs (say, 36 hours?) to get us a little further down the road so that maybe they lose interest. Thanks, . Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:04, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This was semi-protected nearly 3 years ago and never unprotected due to a page move in between.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 03:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 03:29, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations. General Amos is a target of people opposed to his reconsideration of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policies in the US military and this page is constantly being vandalized as a result.Dwpaul Talk 02:04, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 03:15, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – He just announced that he is gay, so there is going to be an incredible amount of attention to this page in this regard in the coming days. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:27, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 02:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 23:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:18, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continual edit warring of anon users re-adding individual results of episodes that were earlier removed based upon the following discussions:

Recent edits: [7], [8], [9]

This edit warring has continued for months despite article deletions & talk page discussions. A protection on the page is necessary to stop edit warring and re-addition of WP:OR. AldezD (talk) 23:05, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:15, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:34, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – not clear what the reason for semi-protection would be. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple instances of unexplained removal of sourced content by IP user(s) over last 48 hours or so, such as [10], [11], & [12] This has been a contentious article (multiple & current recent AfD attempts), so this is extra counter-productive as once again consensus to keep/delete is in question here... Please semi-protect at least until current Afd is resolved... Roberticus (talk) 11:49, 9 February 2014 (UTC). Roberticus (talk) 11:49, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 15:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. (by Berean Hunter) Mark Arsten (talk) 03:22, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 21:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Same vandalism and WP:OR that resulted in the page being protected before. STATic message me! 19:29, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:46, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: renewed edit warring with an editor who fails to refer to reliable sources in order to substantiates his/her claims; maybe we need some time to find a proper solution. Borsoka (talk) 15:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We cant indef it for everyone because of one ditor. If hes a continued problem then a block should suffice. If its a content problem and no attempt at DR is made then the editors in question should be blocked.Lihaas (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:02, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP edit warring.Lihaas (talk) 15:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:52, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Continuous addition of unsourced material and songs from various IP users. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 14:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:50, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: international conflict. Arystanbek (talk) 09:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arystanbek thinks that the city Karaganda should be spelled with a "y", which is sometimes done. This has been discissed in the past at Talk:Karaganda and there is no consensus to move. Lately Arystanbek moved Karaganda to Karagandy by copy-pasting the source, then made Karaganda a redirect to Karagandy, then put a speedy delete notice on the redirect (with the "a") because it's a typo. He's got moxy for sure. Indefinite full protection is absurd here- I can think of another administrative action with the word "indefinite"... Staecker (talk) 18:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 08:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:37, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 08:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – It started again. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 07:34, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Was just going to request this but twinkle caught that a request had already been placed. Just to add to this, some editors have acknowledged the idea of discussing the issues in an RfC. The page being locked until that takes place would likely be beneficial. Gloss • talk 07:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term vandalism starting back in January. -- LuK3 (Talk) 05:29, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 23:15, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: IP vandalism from several years ago has probably died down. Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Mike V • Talk 23:55, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: WP:BLP vandalism by anon IP editors returns after the end of the recent six month protection period. STATic message me! 22:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:49, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: from IP vandalism. reuv T 21:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 22:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A POV pushing IP is harassing and stalking any article where I have recently made edits. See this disscussion (User talk:The Bushranger#Suspicious activity) for details of whats been going on. The administrator Bushranger that I have been discussing with can confirm whats been going on. I have warned the IP against his behavior, but he continues. Last month he was temporarily blocked for the exact same behavior.

I request semi-protection for this article as the IP has decided to persistently target it and I don't wish to go beyond the 3RR, even though the 3RRR doesn't apply to vandalism. Semi-protection I feel is the best procedure. Antiochus the Great (talk) 21:46, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator The Bushranger. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:38, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP hopping idiot being persistent in self promotion.  Velella  Velella Talk   20:41, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:41, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – The article has been subjected to enough temporary semi-prots. Its not working, please indef it. . —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 18:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 22:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

semi protection - ip hopping caste-warrior reinserting massive quantities of outdated claims. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:59, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:35, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: from assorted IP vandalism. Span (talk) 19:53, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Abuse of pending changes privilege, has not be a constructive edit in a long time and rejecting edits is getting tedious. STATic message me! 19:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:24, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Police Story (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Temporary semi-protection: ip-hoppers repeatedly introducing disruptions such as excessive overlinking, overuse of flag icons, unexplained/unref changes. Dl2000 (talk) 19:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – For around a day or two should be enough, multiple IP vandals keep cropping up, I am assuming it would be the same person/persons changing IP Address. . MikeTheEditor104 (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Mike Rosoft. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:17, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Increased IP vandalism all of a sudden. Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:10, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism by multiple accounts and IP users. -=# Amos E Wolfe talk #=- 16:58, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Smalljim. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 22:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: I'd do this myself, but I'm a bit involved. Some user accounts are insisting that it's OK to put in original research, unsourced, and/or POV material in the hope that someday someone will come up with sources to back up the inserted material. There's been a fair amount of socking (on the talk page) as well as a nest of SPAs. The article is already semi-protected. jpgordonUser talk:Jpgordon 21:15, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

11 February 2014

Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Piotrus 3 (edit | project page | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by another admin. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:13, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – This article has been created and deleted 7 times in last 11 days. . Hitro talk 17:50, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:37, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected m.o.p 17:20, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism in just the last week alone. Antoshi ☏ ★ 15:01, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely as this has been a long-term issue. SlimVirgin (talk) 15:46, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP using proxies started edit warring yesterday and was blocked. Returned to article today with different IP to resume edit-war.

The IP has a history of disruptive behavior, especially intensified for the past few days. Using proxies to avoid blocks (i.e IP jumps from country to country).

. Antiochus the Great (talk) 13:37, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Mr. Stradivarius .. SlimVirgin (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotect chia pet and chia pet talk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.188.39.81 (talk) 00:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not unprotected I'm very hesitant to do so given the persistent trolling that prompted the protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:41, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do it. Now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.188.39.81 (talk) 04:07, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That comment just reinforces that the protection is necessary. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism and addition of false information. Recent death DVdm (talk) 15:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: This article has been hammered several times since the last protection expired last February 8 by a IP-hopping vandal. The vandal keeps on adding hoax information, making it look like Myx and Solar News had a some sort of "partnership" and a hoax channel has been established on the vandal's hometown. He sometimes introduce himself in his edits as a certain "Dan Joshua Apura". See his edits last February 8, February 9 and February 11. Note: the vandal has not yet created a WP account ever since he start vandalizing the Myx article. -WayKurat (talk) 11:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:58, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: A substantial amount of vandalism from IPs. This article will be a subject for attacks due media about a sufferer. Would like to request protection for longer than a few weeks if possible 08:35, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:37, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to protect it now from the current vandalism (which was my original intention)? Turn685 (talk) 11:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There hasn't been any vandalism on the article for a week and a half so there isn't enough activity to justify the protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:37, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User request in own userspace. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:20, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:35, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent - long-term anonnymous vandalism. Techsearch547 (talk) 06:20, 11 February 2014 (UTC) Please impose a temporary semi-protection to preserve the integrity of this article.This page is riddled with endemic and endless vandalism committed by Castlemate who has added poorly sourced, contentious material and outdated about the living subject. The material that this user has added are libelous and made from behind a veil of anonymity.[reply]

An article (link:http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/new_litigation_chases_packer_and_iDZle909oE96LFgvXnJORK) about the subject that was written yesterday by the independent and respected paper, the Australian Financial Review, does not make any of the allegations that Castlemate asserts. Techsearch547 (talk) 06:20, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, semi-protection won't help here as both editors are autoconfirmed. Perhaps seek dispute resolution (WP:DR) instead. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Long term history of new users adding inappropriate content and links. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 22:51, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Routine temp protection due to an IP address edit warring against multiple editors. An extremely disruptive editor, User:Baboon43, was permanently banned due to edit warring on the same article (as well as numerous personal attacks on talk pages). It almost seems like sockpuppetry, but either way it's disruptive. A temporary protection usually causes IP vandals like this to give up. MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:25, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. MezzoMezzo please also consider filing an SPI. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:51, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – One person, or group/organization (using over a dozen different IPs) is repeatedly reinserting non-WP:NPOV content, giving it to much WP:Weight, backing it with unrelated sources as reference (which may also not be RS). After discussing it on the talk page, the person/group (different range IPs) continues to re-add the content. Götz (talk) 03:32, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, Right now the level of disruption is a little less than I look for when protecting, but feel free to re-report if disruption continues. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:50, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An IP is having a edit war over here. 173.206.87.250 (talk) 03:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:31, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 22:12, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I'm not sure semi-protection will do much here, as few IPs have recently edited the page. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Too much vandalism lately. George Ho (talk) 06:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not holding off more vandals right now. George Ho (talk) 06:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. (semi for 2 weeks by Materialscientist). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term anon vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 04:27, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent namecrufting. John from Idegon (talk) 04:14, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:13, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: COI IP editor putting in self-references directly against results of heavily socked RFC. Gaijin42 (talk) 04:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Ohnoitsjamie.. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection For some strange reason, the article has become the target of adolescent vandalism. BMK (talk) 04:01, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:11, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 00:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:18, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 23:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 23:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Not enough activity to justify changing the protections, please contact the protecting admin if you would believe the PC should be replaced with semi protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:14, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term vandalism dating to early January and late 2013. -- LuK3 (Talk) 03:29, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Span (talk) 01:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:46, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 03:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Anonymous user adding irrelevant, negatively biased and plain incorrect information. JSebastian83 (talk) 23:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined JSebastian83 are you sure you reported the right page? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:10, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 22:52, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There have been no edits 31 October 2013, are you sure you reported the right page? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 22:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Correct information has been changed several times because of mistaken media reports. The correct info is on the article Talk Page, but it's still being changed. mpbx (talk) 20:19, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Full protection is my only option as the users adding the claim are autoconfirmed, given the disruption that full protection will cause and that is prevents pretty much everyone from editing (and on a reasonably high profile article like this we may get new editor involved) I'm declining the protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 22:46, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term IP and non-autoconfirmed vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 23:42, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: BLP policy violations. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:50, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:08, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Greedo8 (talk) 18:27, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandalism magnet, but the vandalism tends to come in fits and spurts. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 13:04, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I'd prefer to stick with PC since there are some good IP edits in the history. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:53, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Temporary semi-protection: Important information has to be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.191.67.169 (talk • contribs)

Not unprotected Please submit an edit request on the article's talk page (when you try to edit the page you will receive instructions on how to do this. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Although we often add information that is important, being important is not a criterion that we use when deciding whether to add information. Rather, we use WP:Verifiability and WP:Consensus, among others. If you really need to add something while the page is protected you can request it using an edit request. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 12:18, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

12 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some anonymous user is intent on adding a wealth of unreferenced material to this BLP. C679 05:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Warn them appropriately then report to AIV if they continue. Since it's only one user semi protection is not appropriate. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - addition of false information, possible sock puppet IP addressed editing it and also lots of personal attacks from the user when I questioned the edit the user made. See [13], [14], [15], [16], [17] (suspected sock puppetry here as the user Yatzhek is replying and two random IP addresses - this is going to be reported).--Windows66 (talk) 16:29, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Done ---BDD (talk) 19:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Unconstructive edits (not quite vandalism) from a couple of new accounts. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:52, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of ten days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection persistent poorly sourced additions, opinion, commentary to a WP:BLP. Doniger is in the news -- her book, The Hindus, was removed from the shelves in India per yesterday's court order. — goethean 12:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Pending changes level 1 protection IP hopping user (all from the same region in Germany) is slow-motion edit warring against the consensus of at least four editors.[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] Most of the editors working on the page are reviewers or administrators, so PC edits should go through quickly. --Guy Macon (talk) 11:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Semi to deal with the edit warring as PC can't be used during edit wars and indefinitely pending changes protected for the continued vandalism and disruptive editing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full Protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Don't know if matter has been taken to article talk page yet. However, users are discussing at each other's talk pages. Rzxz1980 (talk) 06:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP vandalism and dubious unsourced changes. STATic message me! 07:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Persistent edit warring. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, looks like the reverts have died down over the past couple days. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Jamesx12345 18:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:50, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 06:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:27, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Persistent addition of controversial information without a reliable source. Flat Out let's discuss it 05:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP socks edit-warring. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 05:35, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/persistent edit warring. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Popular article in schools, with the repeated low-level vandalism that brings with it. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. I've also semi-protected the page for a week. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indef semi-protection: One of the previous temp semi-protections sums it up best: "No constructive anonymous edits in recent history". In fact, nearly all edits to the page in the last 3 years have been either IP vandalism or the reversion of it. Has been temp semi-protected (and even temp full-protected) numerous times and the IP vandalism keeps coming back each time. It's time for an ongoing silverlock pbp 15:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected indefinitely. 04:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple accounts (both new and IP) adding unsourced and pure puffery to article. Ravensfire (talk) 02:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. I've also semi-protected the page for one week. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Incorrect WP:ENGVAR edits by IPs. Murry1975 (talk) 22:27, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Page is currently template-protected, which should not be used on articles. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:40, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging the protecting admin, Discospinster. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed it to full article protection. ... discospinster talk 04:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions and vandalism by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 00:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous additions of original research. – Recollected • 21:33, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Dwpaul Talk 21:14, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Page is currently template-protected, which should not be used on articles. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:41, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Ymblanter.. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Page is currently template-protected, which should not be used on articles. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:40, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator JzG.. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. --Jakob (talk) 16:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Addition of unsourced content and also lots of other vandal activity. EthicallyYours! 16:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Lots of vandal activity going on in this page. Request PC-1 protection. EthicallyYours! 16:09, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 00:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

13 February 2014

Semi-protection: Moderate level of IP/new account vandalism over the last few days. Ishdarian 21:55, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of continual IP vandalism. Spshu (talk) 21:30, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:35, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article was protected for one week. At the end of this, the same IP (and sockpuppet) recommenced the same vandalism. Maybe protect for longer this time?. Egghead06 (talk) 20:14, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:27, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. gsk 19:56, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:21, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Seems to be lots of vandalism/edit warring, it's hard to keep up with what is properly referenced facts and what is garbage. PC should help... Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 19:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. There doesn't seem to be too much actual vandalism - it's mostly edit warring, and I see plenty of edits by good-faith IPs. Instead I have warned the user who keeps adding the contested material, as it violates WP:NOR. I'll keep an eye on the article too. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:03, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: As this page is now on the "in the news" box on the main page, its visibility is significantly increased; perhaps a temporary protection to catch subtle vandalism would be prudent. Cogito-Ergo-Sum (14) (talk) 18:37, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I might be missing it, but I don't see much vandalism yet. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP user constantly adding a very poorly sourced anti-Obama section of text, which also violates WP:UNDUE (they think Fox News-level sources are acceptable). Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:11, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, it's only one IP so I suggest reporting him to WP:AN3 if he continues. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:08, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some IP user keeps adding the duplicate of a link to the article. Codename Lisa (talk) 16:49, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. @Codename Lisa: It's almost to the level where protection would be necessary, but I don't think it's quite there yet. I would try and discuss things with the IP if they revert again, and if that doesn't work maybe try WP:AN3 or file another report here. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:15, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of non-notable and irrelevant things. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:18, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Repeated addition of unsourced claims and vandalism, removal of whole section. One person is repeatedly deleting non-WP:NPOV content.LardoBalsamico (talk) 15:34, 13 February 2014 (UTC) I am that "one person" and I didn't know that one user can point out it's non-npov content. It's obviously not written in a natural point of view. I have already made my case on the above stated article's talk page and also on the neutral point of view noticeboard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard) so for things to be fair, I think, there must be a solution from there first.Rivaner (talk) 17:46, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, both users are autoconfirmed so semi-protection won't help here. There's not quite enough reverting to justify full protection at this point either. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:03, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not preventing possible sockpuppetry. George Ho (talk) 21:21, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:25, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent unsourced information about a drummer's departure, plus other things. No official statement from the band yet on this, so its inclusion is not yet appropriate. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 20:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There seems to be a long-term vandalism spree from differing editors occurring on this page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:56, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 21:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:55, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:26, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: – Persistent vandalism by anons following the recent death of the subject. —Vensatry (Ping) 18:18, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:09, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP hopper keeps disruptively inserting improperly sourced content about this living person. User also keeps changing section header capitalization to "Title Case" instead of "Sentence case" in vio of MOS:SECTIONCAPS. Requesting 48 hour block against IPs to dissuade future attempts. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:33, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 21:06, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term pattern of roaming IP vandalism including the introduction of derogatory information contravening WP:BLP. Leaky Caldron 15:57, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 21:04, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 08:07, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Incorrect facts re-introduced numerous times by anonymous IP users. Bailmoney27 talk 23:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:51, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Seems like an obvious target for WP:BLP violations; also, a significant portion of edits are IP vandals. Cogito-Ergo-Sum (14) (talk) 21:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:53, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Sockpuppetry. Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:20, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I'd rather leave it unprotected. Europefan is persistent and will keep going, I'd rather they target a page we know about and can delete and block rather than a pick a new title which we need to try and find. But I'm happy for another admin to protect if they wish. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 15:43, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, while you were typing that I Creation protected indefinitely.. Feel free to undo if you feel it's best. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 15:44, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism IP hopper - short term. --DHeyward (talk) 12:36, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 15:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mufaddalqn (talk) 12:33, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 15:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term IP vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:51, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For the more short term stuff: Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. And for the longer term issue on the page: Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:21, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Some good IP edits, but mostly vandalism. --Jakob (talk) 01:10, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:15, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Persistent low-level vandalism. --Jakob (talk) 01:07, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:16, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Frequent vandalism, especially regarding sales numbers. Mayast (talk) 19:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:56, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: As mentioned before the election is approaching (by May) so more will happen. Its not just presumption, the history page will show that it is already happening.Lihaas (talk) 17:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of ten days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:58, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Sudden burst in vandalism/unconstructive IP edits in the past few days due to Google Doodle. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:45, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:49, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP vandalism again (since January 2014).*SGR* (talk) 09:40, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:44, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. George Ho (talk) 08:56, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disney articles being targetted by an IP-hopper

Long-term semi-protection: - Persistent vandalism. An IP hopping vandal is persistently adding in factually incorrect information (changing mentions of Toon Disney premieres to Disney XD, despite this being impossible, as Disney XD did not exist when Toon Disney did). No good blocking the latest IP, as there'll be another new one soon. The vandalism has been occurring, on and off, since at least December of last year, so it needs to be stopped, and stopped now. There are some more articles being affected, but they weren't vandalized yesterday/today. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done I've semi protected all but one which doesn't have the same amount of vandalism as the others, plus I've blocked the latest IP. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Long-term semi-protection: Persistent vandalism - related to the above report, but there are even more IPs involved in editing unconstructively and introducing factual errors here. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Very high level of vandalism by anon IP editors and new users. STATic message me! 07:45, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Jamesx12345 07:52, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:29, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP continues to vandalize and disruptive edits. Digifan23 (talk) 04:12, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Kusma (t·c) 09:31, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP sock of LanguageXpert repeatedly nominating it for PROD along with other articles that I created. SMS Talk 09:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Same requested for:

-- SMS Talk 09:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The edits have been spread over around 6 days so short of pending changes protection (which still needs to be reverted) a reasonably long term semi protection would be needed. I'm not sure that it'd be appropriate for semi for that reason so I'd appreciate opinions from other admins (and feel free to protect them). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of unsourced anon edits that need reverting. JMHamo (talk) 20:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I'm not seeing many reverts. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:31, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Anonymous user adding irrelevant, negatively biased and plain incorrect information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JSebastian83 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 11 February 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

@JSebastian83: I assume you mean Microsoft Dynamics NAV (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Callanecc: Yes, that is correct. JSebastian83 (talk) 19:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined It looks like it's stopped, feel free to re-report if it starts up again. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:32, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requests on Talk page to unprotect and redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball. NintendoFan (Talk, Contribs) 02:46, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Please ask the protecting admin. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:53, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. Jguard18 Critique Me 02:59, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – This template is not used widely enough to be considered a high-risk template. It only has two transclusions at the moment and no documentation page. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:03, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary create protection: Repeatedly recreated. -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:01, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Vandalism. 108.216.20.135 (talk) 21:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:37, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Heavy IP vandalism from slightly different IPs at the same US school over the past few days. McGeddon (talk) 23:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:24, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Persistent sockpuppetry by User:Beleiutz since September 2013. Psychonaut (talk) 21:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:29, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protection: Discovered user who repeatedly vandalized this article by deleting it in it's entirety and replacing it with two incoherent hateful paragraphs that lacked any references. Agrestringere (talk) 16:56, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, it's only one editor right now, so I suggest seeking sanctions against him instead of protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:29, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:50, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:07, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:10, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:46, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:12, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk)

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:13, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection: Continual BLP violations by IP editors and newly registered users. For several months there has been a stream of controversial allegations added to the page, relying entirely on self-published sources. The editors adding this material evidently misunderstand BLP policy. StAnselm (talk) 01:04, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin (talk) 01:18, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Lowering protection level from full to semi . Jguard18 Critique Me 02:20, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:52, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: At least two IPs adding (different) false information. Trivialist (talk) 00:11, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Semi came off a couple days ago and now we have spammers and soapboxers again. NeilN talk to me 22:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:40, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – All major contributions since October have been either copyvios/promotional editing by sockpuppets of User:Beleiutz or vandalism by anonymous IPs. Psychonaut (talk) 21:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:39, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism.   Tentinator   21:27, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Smartse.. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:37, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 21:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:36, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of BLP vandalism immediately following the end of the most recent protection period. STATic message me! 19:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:34, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Repeated addition of unsourced claims and vandalism, removal of whole section. 26oo (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:31, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, some of it going unnoticed for a while. vzaak 16:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User request at users own namespace. (t) Josve05a (c) 16:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:23, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Attempted whitewash by POV/COI editor who edits under the same name as the editor-in-chief of this journal. Randykitty (talk) 15:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:25, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. (t) Josve05a (c) 14:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:22, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – repeated addition of unsourced claims, possibly vandalism. Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 13:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:21, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP editor keeps making hoax addition about Butch Hartmann directing. Binksternet (talk) 12:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. If they keep going I'll semi protect it. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Page has been vandalized at 10:08 PM EST last night. IPadPerson (talk) 08:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 00:20, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

14 February 2014

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. VQuakr (talk) 20:49, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@VQuakr: Could you elaborate a little bit? The article hasn't been protected before, and it's not immediately obvious who is supposed to be a sockpuppet of who. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:10, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Mr. Stradivarius: of course. I should have posted more detail the first time around, sorry. This appears to likely be meat puppetry, not sockpuppetry (though that is possible as well). The article has been the subject of off-Wiki canvassing by third parties as well as the organization's founder, ie here and here. VQuakr (talk) 07:31, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined. This looks more like a content dispute than sockpuppetry to me. The only suspect account that started editing the article after the Twitter posts you link to has already been blocked. I was considering using full protection to prevent further edit warring, but the frequency and number of the recent reverts don't quite seem enough to justify protection just yet. If editors at the article start reverting each other wholesale without discussion, please make a new request either here or at WP:ANEW. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 15:58, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Uncletomwood (talk) 13:10, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. If it keeps going much longer it'll be worth protecting but not just yet. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:58, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Should have the same protection as the So Solid Crew article, since all of the vandalism to that article is people adding funny names to the list of artists. McGeddon (talk) 11:57, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:53, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – please protect until BLP issues are resolved. See WP:BLPN. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 15:59, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent Vandalism following the announcement of the merger with Comcast. Constant changing of the ownership structure etc.. It will be at least a year before this merger will be consummated and Comcast takes full ownership. For now I'd like to see that only confirmed registered users should be able to edit this page. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 07:30, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 16:02, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 12:47, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined There's only been one vandal edit to the page since PC was applied (and it was caught by the PC protection and bot reverted). No indication that any stronger page protection is warranted at this time. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:50, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP edit warring. Physical exams are needed prior to signing a contract. The team in question, the Baltimore Orioles, nixed two deals this offseason already because of failed physicals. Need a couple days. – Muboshgu (talk) 12:52, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:56, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated vandalism from multiple ips is confusing cluebot. A short term protection until the attacks subside will make this a lot easier to maintain. SabreBD (talk) 07:55, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:05, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Pinethicket (talk) 13:10, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:02, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 12:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:52, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – People fighting over pictures instead of discussing them. The Banner talk 11:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. If consensus for the image is arrived at before the protection expires, ping me and I'll happily remove it (or post a request for reduction below). Yunshui 雲‍水 12:57, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent addition of dubious unsourced material by IPs. William Avery (talk) 08:16, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:00, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:31, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:51, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent restoration of errant information and failure to respond to talk-page discussion prompt. --EEMIV (talk) 01:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:30, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP and new user vandalism, possible sock puppetry (Talk:Unapologetic#Page_fully_protected). Dan56 (talk) 01:27, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:33, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Several times a month an IP address keeps adding false information, and gets reverted by me or someone else. The last two times this has happened have been just days apart. This has been going on since last year and isn't going to stop. Please block all IP addresses from editing this page. Look through the history, and see how many times an IP address has done the same edit, and been reverted, and how few edits for anything else the article is getting. Dream Focus 01:16, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:19, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In a month the same guy will be back with a new IP address doing the same exact thing, as he does every single month. Dream Focus 13:52, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 00:52, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Alex Bakharev.. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection both articles have near 100 names. IPs change the names and right now, I don't know the correct edition. I ask for a semi-protection, because the magazines give the awards one day per year, so the 364 days are vandalized. Right now, the PWI awards, Ips are changin the Most Inspirational wrestler bewteen Young and Bryan. the Stanley Weston award between Rhodes and Bearer. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 00:36, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:21, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked user User:Dromeaz is back with so far two IPs. He attempted to remove a section critical of the subject because the link was dead. Now that the new page has been located, he is attempting to remove it because its behind a paywall. I've blocked the IPs temporarily, but it's not likely to stop there. I would appreciate a different admin to look at the protection issue, as I believe long-term semi-protection will help. The article has been an issue one way or the other since 2007. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:55, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:30, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

15 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short term IP vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 21:24, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Quickly becoming an IP playground. Most of which are adding and removing various unsourced information left and right. Gloss • talk 18:37, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Blocked user due to sockpuppetry. Please note of the template shown. 𝕁𝕠𝕣𝕕𝕒𝕟𝕂𝕪𝕤𝕖𝕣𝟚𝟚 𝕋𝕒𝕝𝕜 𝕥𝕠 𝕞𝕖 / 𝕊𝕖𝕖 𝕙𝕠𝕨 𝕀 𝕒𝕞 𝕕𝕠𝕚𝕟𝕘 / 𝕄𝕪 𝕠𝕨𝕟 𝕦𝕤𝕖𝕣𝕓𝕠𝕩𝕖𝕤 21:45, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you want the protection lowered? Mark Arsten (talk) 01:38, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, my bad, decline it anyway. 𝕁𝕠𝕣𝕕𝕒𝕟𝕂𝕪𝕤𝕖𝕣𝟚𝟚 𝕋𝕒𝕝𝕜 𝕥𝕠 𝕞𝕖 / 𝕊𝕖𝕖 𝕙𝕠𝕨 𝕀 𝕒𝕞 𝕕𝕠𝕚𝕟𝕘 / 𝕄𝕪 𝕠𝕨𝕟 𝕦𝕤𝕖𝕣𝕓𝕠𝕩𝕖𝕤 15:51, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, per above —GFOLEY FOUR!— 16:47, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ellen Page (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Subject recently just came out as gay, vandalism has already started up. Page also only just came off a page protection two days ago. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 10:24, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Past two weeks have been quite bad, no constructive edits. Jamesx12345 10:17, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. 188.47.125.72 (talk) 09:08, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:46, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Article has a history of promotional editing from the people who created the film. Currently one IP is editing the article to make it promotional and another editor w/ an account doesn't understand how it's promotional. Talking it out, but a semi-protection against IP editing will save a lot of time since this looks like it'll be a fairly common occurrence. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:22, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Sorry there just isn't enough there for me to justify semi protecting it. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:44, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP hopping vandal who may be my recent harasser. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 07:10, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:00, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP hopping vandal who may be related to the person who was harassing me for some time. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 07:10, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:58, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – IP socks and new accounts edit-warring. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 05:19, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Let's see how that works first. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:40, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

School articles

Temporary semi-protection for both articles mentioned above: Disruptive editing by multiple IP addresses and new users. NHRHS2010 RIP M.H. (1994-2014) 03:51, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:29, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Hi, I am requesting an elevation to the current page protection. The pending changes function, which allow for reviewers to approve/deny edits doesn't seem to be doing anything to stem the tide of disruption. Articles related to Bollywood films are apparently high profile, and for whatever reason, campaigns exist to corrupt and misinform. Requesting article be limited to auto-confirmed users. I'm not sure what duration is appropriate, but it's only February and the article gets vandalized multiple times each day. Thanks,. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:36, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. FYI HJ Mitchell I've replaced your pending changes given the high edit rate. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:54, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 02:18, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Short of a pressing need (such as a high edit rate) you should ask the protecting admin User:Mark Arsten to change their protection before coming here. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:17, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Looks like it's doing exactly what it's supposed to do - filter out nonconstructive edits and allow new and unregistered users to make constructive edits. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:14, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 02:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Definitely not enough the warrant semi protection and it's bordering on not enough for PC either. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:12, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Episode synopses are almost always copied from official or other sources. They typically also employ content written in a promotional style that is not in proper encyclopedic tone. For example "When Sonya Frost failed to predict a gale, she built a weather machine – to accurately forecast weather she created! ... Can Daisy get Sonya on side, and will our team remain ice-cool as the action heats up?" Embedded notes reminding users of the need to re-write are often ignored, as is the giant edit notice that appears at the top of the edit window:

Thanks, and sorry for the giant notice. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:09, 15 February 2014 (UTC). Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:09, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:28, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 01:42, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:57, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – PC is not working. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 00:40, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:57, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP still readding the same anti-Obama piece, despite being reverted by two separate editors. Also is trying to game 3RR so they can't be blocked, I think. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:58, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:44, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Theparties (talk) 19:17, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I still don't think that there is enough there to warrant protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:01, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism resumed after previous protection expired. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 16:30, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Let's give it sometime and see what happens. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:46, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 00:14, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I full protected it due to edit warring today. I'm not sure it's highly visible though, I'm only seeing 30 or so transclusions. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:37, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – This template is not used widely enough to be considered a high-risk template. I agree, maybe enough for semi protection if there is history of nonconstructive editing on related articles. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Some IP vandals are constantly forging statistics in the infobox since a long time.--Oleola (talk) 22:51, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 01:40, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Barek. (semi). Mark Arsten (talk) 01:41, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:99.247.162.199 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Full protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 18:54, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: The article has been vandalized by an anonymous IP user 7 times in the last 12 hours, with football hooliganism and profanity apparent in the edit summary each time. The article has also been frequently vandalized in the past before the current incident. Ithinkicahn (talk) 16:31, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for those vandalisms is for the lack of neutral point of view in this article. I can understand them but I don't agree with the methods of those users and made my best to keep everybody calm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:93.115.94.149#About_2011_Turkish_sports_corruption_scandal_article) I have already made my case to the neutral point of view noticeboard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#2011_Turkish_sports_corruption_scandal_article). Before that the ""vandalisms" belong to me. Although I gave reasons for my every edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LardoBalsamico#2011_Turkish_sports_corruption_scandal_article) ıt was referred as vandalism. I am waiting for a resolution from the neutral point of view noticeboard and I will adivese everyone involved to do the same. Thanks for your patience and understanding.Rivaner (talk) 19:40, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rivaner, are you saying that this vandalism was only caused by the lack of neutral point of view? And that you can "understand" these? Look at these in the last 24 hours:
Semi-protection wouldn't stop you from editing, just the disruptive edits by the anonymous IPs (of which there were 2 separate ones in the above list). Ithinkicahn (talk) 00:03, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:43, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 17:53, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined for now. I can't see a BLP issue, at least not recently. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:17, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi Protections

Temporary semi-protection: An IP insists on adding and removing unnecessary sections texts with references and add information without reference. I ask for protection for these items because the ip only thing it does is generate edit wars GeorgeMilan talk 06:00, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the edit warring noticeboard – This is a case of possible edit-warring by one or two users. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:04, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary reduction so I can add the error-tracking we have at c-ja, c-en, etc. Not a simple edit request, as it may need fine-tuning once we see what the errors are, if any. — kwami (talk) 09:37, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protected indefinitely. Given it has over 50000 transclusions please use a sandbox and testcases before making an edit request. Once you've worked it out in the sandbox a template-editor can make the change for you. Just to clarify with that many transclusions and your suggested method of trial and error I'm not going to drop it to semi. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:53, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, perhaps until end of the Winter Olympics as this seems to be the main target period. Krazytea(talk) 20:19, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:41, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Short-term vandalism by multiple users. -- LuK3 (Talk) 19:22, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator GiantSnowman.. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Lots of unsourced speculation the he will become manager of Fulham F.C. --Jaellee (talk) 19:21, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator GiantSnowman.. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:36, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. K6ka (talk | contribs) 16:41, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:40, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – edit war. The Banner talk 14:54, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:38, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

16 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent subtle vandalism (claiming he is not something that he in fact is). Bigpoliticsfan(talk) 15:54, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined PC is doing the job just fine Bigpoliticsfan. Callanecc (talk • contribs •logs) 04:13, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: New vandalism-only accounts surfacing to disrupt the 12th man (football) article after a recent WP:SPA and IP-edit war pushed it intoprotected status on Feb 2, expiring on Feb 9. UW Dawgs(talk) 15:30, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Not enough at the moment, I'd consider PC if there was a lower edit rate. If it continues please do re-report. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:21, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandalism starting back in 2013. . -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:25, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. There are some good edits too so I'll give PC a go. Callanecc (talk •contribs • logs) 04:07, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Disruptive editing by anon IP hopper. STATic message me! 00:22, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined There are also good edits by IPs (or at least edits that aren't being reverted) so I'd rather not semi-protect. It looks like the same IP has been used for a while so warn the take to WP:AIV. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Herald talk with me 16:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A sudden increase in vandalism in the last week or two. Diannaa (talk) 15:32, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:18, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template-editor or semi-indef It has 30 transclusions, and I can't see any justification for protection, other than maybe messing up WP:Good Articles somehow. Definitely not highly-visible. meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 07:02, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CBM I'd like to drop the protection of both this template and Template:Roundup (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) to edit=autoconfirmed and move=templateeditor. Since CBM protected Roundup I'll check with them first. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:18, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ty. meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 05:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Poison Whiskey 02:51, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 14:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 00:07, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: This is a draft of an article that was intended to be taken to WP:LONGTERM regarding some particularly difficult sock puppeteers. The idea was abandoned, but I kept it in case it would be needed in future. Nothing links to the page, and it should be difficult to find unless you knew what to look for. In the past twelve hours, a user has taken to blanking the page on the grounds that it is an attack page and is refusing to back down. I suspect this user to be the latest incarnation of said sock puppeteer, and will go to SPI accordingly, but for now I would like the page protected. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 11:57, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Prisonermonkeys: How long would you like? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:20, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:57, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Given that this is TFA and it been Vandalised by 3 different users already it makes sense to me to semi this article till the end of the day. . Jeffrd10 (talk) 13:10, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected until 23:00, 15 February 2014 (UTC). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:09, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Requesting immediate archiving... Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP hopper persistently adding unsourced content to the infobox. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:24, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: Persistant addition of unsourced content by IP users, as well as vandalism. XXX8906 (talk) 17:35, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:27, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:24, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:27, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple IPs inserting material claiming he is a murderer. Auric talk 00:20, 16 February 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:12, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection More disruptive 'fantasy TV lineup" editing three days after the last semi-protect expiration. Nate • (chatter) 20:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:14, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP playground. Gloss • talk 16:55, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:09, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism. STATic message me! 16:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:01, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Palmtree5551 (talk) 21:06, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 2 weeks. Then it will default back to the pending changes protection. Mike V • Talk 22:13, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lugia2453 (talk) 18:08, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Ronhjones.. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 13:40, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 00:07, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

17 February 2014

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article is the target of long term and persistent vandalism by the same editor from a variety of ip addresses. They are determined and temporary protection will not resolve the problem, so this is an exceptional case of requesting indefinite protection. SabreBD (talk) 19:23, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 years, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 19:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request one month protection due to persistent vandalism from IP editors. LT910001 (talk) 16:10, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 19:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requesting an upgrade from PC1 to semi. Mark Arsten PC1-ed this article about a month ago but vandalism has continued. From my quick pass through the history and logs it looks like every single reviewable edit has been reverted since the protection was instated. --ElHef (Meep?) 04:29, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, PC seems to be functioning as designed. Edit count is low so neccessity in reviewing edits isn't causing a problem. GedUK  12:14, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:39, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protected Mike V • Talk 16:47, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Frequent changing of genres (WP:GENREWARRIORs) constituting WP:OR. Adabow (talk) 11:45, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:30, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-hopper adding incorrect information and on its way to editwarring. The Banner talk 11:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:28, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism and addition of badly sourced connections with atheism. DVdm (talk) 11:02, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:25, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

full-protection: Existing article OMICS Creations [33] comes under films and movies companies. Frequently redirecting to un-known Scientific Publishing Group by group of WP users. Movieking007 (talk) 08:08, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Scholarscentral -- what is really needed here is a block of Movieking007 for edit-warring and sock-puppetry. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:39, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:23, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – Several new accounts, which are surely socks, have been pushing their agenda of removing sourced information regarding a decline in her career and including a long list of awards and nominations against consensus (please see the revision history). Here are some of these accounts: this, this, this, and this. One of the newly created accounts left this edit summary here: "i work for rani mukerji and she would prefer having all her awards with her film performances together so people can refer to which movie to watch of hers." Any way to stop this?. krimuk 90 04:37, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:17, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism since the article has been created, which seems to be increasing now that the ACLU has gotten involved in the lawsuit. AnnerTown (talk) 02:57, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. SlimVirgin (talk) 05:38, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism in this controversial article. Cadiomals (talk) 21:36, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- John Reaves 04:25, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Some editors removed content without explanation. Fortunately, I recovered content. George Ho (talk) 18:41, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- John Reaves 04:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – An editor keeps on removing the redirect. There is no reason for this redirect to be edited. Finealt (talk) 17:48, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Non-Admin Comment the requestor has deleted the content replacing it with a redirect and been revert, the re-deleted and redirected again some six days later and again been reverted and undone- without a merge/redirect/afd having taking place. WP:BRD is needed by Finealt, page doesnt need protection. I will undo the blanking of content, seemingly against consensus. Murry1975 (talk) 18:11, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree - it's not "an editor", it's several different editors. YOU are choosing to repeatedly blank this page and replace it with redirects to unrelated articles - first the US channel, then a different channel in the UK which tangentially mentions this one on its article page. Your entire edit history is removing content, blanking and deleting articles with no discussion or consensus, and in most cases the reasons which you make these changes are wrong. To request page protection because a number of different editors disagree with you is clearly an abuse of the process. Bonusballs (talk) 18:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined User blocked. Take further concerns to WP:RFD. -- John Reaves 04:23, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. – Recollected • 03:59, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP hopper persistently adding unsourced content to the infobox. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Premature at this point. -- John Reaves 04:20, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – to prevent unregistered users from committing vandalism. Vjmlhds 14:26, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- John Reaves 04:14, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent semi-protection: The temporary semi-protection from IP editing expired on the 11th and we've already had someone come on to vandalize the page again. It might seem a bit early but I can guarantee that the IP vandalism will only continue each time it's unprotected. This is probably one of the more often vandalized book pages out there. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:51, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. Should the page experience additional vandalism, then it would be reasonable to protect it. As for now it's too early to do so. Mike V • Talk 01:51, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – She just interviewed Bode Miller on television and probed him with questions, and he ended up in tears. Long story short, vandals are reflecting their views of her on the page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:36, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requesting 1 month; persistent IP vandalism from multiple IP addresses over the past two weeks. LT910001 (talk) 03:23, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. SlimVirgin (talk) 05:36, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandal is hitting the page hard recently with nonsensical content. Requesting a 48 hour protection from non auto-confirmed users please. Thanks,. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:11, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. persistent, long-term vandalism. -- John Reaves 04:41, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 03:16, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 5 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Materialscientist (talk) 03:38, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – 3 months; target of at least 4 attacks of vandalism in the last month (insertion of names, song lyrics, content deletion) by multiple IP editors. LT910001 (talk) 02:08, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 02:50, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kids' Choice Awards articles

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP vandal repeatedly adding unsourced material. SummerPhD (talk) 16:58, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. -- John Reaves 04:16, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions by anon IP editors. Also disruptive IP hopper. STATic message me! 20:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:35, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: After the semi-protection ran out, IP vandalism started up again. --Jaellee (talk) 18:08, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: not full, just the PC. Unneeded when it was intended to be indefinitely semi-protected. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 23:59, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Mark Arsten (talk) 01:24, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protected Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protected Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protected Mark Arsten (talk) 01:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Increasing vandalism from multiple IPs. Game is high-profile so there will be more as it releases next month. Don't think this page qualifies for semi-protection yet, so PC works. Consider protection through March 11/25 release date. czar ♔ 16:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:28, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism from multiple IPs, especially within last week. Game is high-profile so there will likely be more. Not sure if page qualifies for semi-protection yet, so PC is okay. Consider protection through March 21 release date. czar ♔ 16:27, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:25, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Hack (talk) 15:22, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator GiantSnowman.. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – In the past month, continuous addition of unsourced possible BLP violations by multiple IPs. . Ugog Nizdast (talk) 13:47, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 22:21, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request 3 months of page protection. Persistent vandalism from IP editors. LT910001 (talk) 13:33, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article contains information which is highly susceptible to media gossip, speculation and rumour with the result that any reported change in judging personnel is immediately reflected by IPs. No formal RS announcements are made until June/July each season. Leaky Caldron 12:52, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Shirt58.. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:19, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that "Bambifan" is not coming back, and I'm positive that sockpuppetry will be rare. Protecting admin. inactive since 2011. Lower to PC? --George Ho (talk) 19:03, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 22:16, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Vandalism by Cross-wiki LTA user.--Lanwi1 (talk) 12:38, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from various IPs. Article was previously protected for three months, but vandals have returned. AD (talk) 11:46, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Content disputes and Persistent vandalism. Joe Parkinson (talk) 23:32, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Best, Mifter (talk) 14:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 10:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Best, Mifter (talk) 14:34, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Vandalism by Cross-wiki LTA user.--Lanwi1 (talk) 09:52, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Favonian (talk) 10:15, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some IP doesn't like me. ~Frosty (Talk page) 07:54, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Materialscientist (talk) 07:56, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi protection: Persistent vandalism from one registered user and a static IP. Need pending approval or something for a few months! HkCaGu (talk) 07:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:21, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism and edit warring (the page history is kind of overwhelming). — Rhododendrites talk |  20:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Ronhjones.. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:20, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary template protection: Requesting reduction in protection level of template. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 00:21, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I see that my early request was declined because this template isn't highly enough seen to be protected, yet it is still fully protected. I'm asking that the protection level be lowered to  Template editor so that I may answer any edit requests (like the one sitting there all day). As a side note, the archiving bot is just too fast in here, it really should be slowed down a bit. Thank you. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 00:27, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection was recently made for this page, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot I NotifyOnline 00:36, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined This is protected due to a content dispute, so full protection is appropriate. The instructions for template protection state that it isn't to be used for content disputes. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:38, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mark Arsten, I read that a little differently. It doesn't say it is prohibited from use on pages where there was a content dispute, it simply says that it isn't to be applied instead of full protection in these cases. "This is a new protection level[1] that replaces full protection on pages that are merely protected due to high transclusion rates, rather than content disputes. It should only be used on templates whose risk factor would have otherwise warranted full protection." I see no-where in there that it says that if there is a content dispute, this level of protection can't be used upon request. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 02:39, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this template isn't merely protected due to high transclusion rates, so it doesn't seem like the kind of situation where template protection is indicated. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:51, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Mark's interpretation on this one. Plus it's up to admins to determine consensus for changes during an edit war so full protection is needed. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:01, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

18 February 2014

Whatever's appropriate. The article history is an ongoing story of vandalism and reverting rather than constructive edits. Sportfan5000 (talk) 05:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. What a vandal magnet, and highly likely to resume being a vandal magnet if the protection is ever lifted. I observe that the vast majority of disruptive edits in the article's history come from anonymous IP addresses, so semi-protection seems appropriate.

Semi-protection for two months. An IP editor has continued to load the "Plot" section with complaints about scientific accuracy without contributing to description of the plot. Editor has removed cautionary tags and cited blogs as sources. Editor argues ("Dude, deal with it.") rather than discusses.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 02:02, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I've warned the IP in question, there seems to be good faith editing as well so I'd rather not protect it. Report them to WP:ANEW if they continue edit warring. If more than just that IP starts up then feel free to re-report to here. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:31, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Indefinite semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked – IP's messing with the page, perhaps socks of the blocked user. Safiel (talk) 23:52, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. The last IP edit was more than a month ago. Armbrust The Homunculus 00:41, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – The Football project has consistently indicated that FIFA nationality is to be used. This subject was born in a country for which he does not play, but he played one game for them earlier. Anons and new editors have been changing the article to reflect a dual citizenship, which is inaccurate. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I imagine this will be back here soon, but we'll start with a week and see how it goes. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:58, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Both users, who created this article (MadMans1019 & Tylermany1342), were blocked. Maybe that's enough for now? Armbrust The Homunculus
Declined Watchlisted, I'd rather not give them the satisfaction. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP users vandalizing and generally being unconstructive for a long period of time. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:34, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I can only see 4 problematic IP edits in the last year. IMO not enough for protection. Armbrust The Homunculus 00:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, per above Mark Arsten (talk) 01:17, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template – Also I'm being chased by a banned user who likes to blindly revert things I've just edited. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:30, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, per above Mark Arsten (talk) 01:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Most of the major cities have semi-protection status (this is capital of most populous Indian state). In addition this article is subject of rampant editing pushing uncited, copivio, POV, promotion, etc. Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haidertcs 19:02, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request 3 weeks of protection due to persistent vandalism from a number of IP addresses. LT910001 (talk) 16:15, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Ongoing IP revert war/ vandalism. IP edits have been ongoing issue for months, have restarted several times upon expiration of past protections. Dialectric (talk) 01:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:44, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP user continually deleting valid text. . Hot Stop 01:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:45, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An IP-hopping user (151.*) continues to submit potentially libelous information about BLP article subject. Started about a week ago and frequency has picked up a little. Requesting a few days of protection from non-autoconfirmed users. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:52, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:30, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Speculation, IPs doing unconstructive edits, and a banned user harassing me as the cherry on top. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:36, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:51, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection Persistent vandal under IP and named account changing content to that of Second Amendment to the United States Constitution despite band's name clearly being a plural pun. Nate • (chatter) 01:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I've also added a hatnote to the article. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some ip users trying to delete this navbox by creating a redirect to another template. But this navbox was keep at TfD: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_June_17#Template:Olympic_sports. Please semi-protect this template from ip users. NickSt (talk) 00:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) In this case "some ip users" actually means 1 IP (162.239.236.97 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), who wasn't even warned yet). IMO it would be better to take action against them, instead of protecting this template. (Not highly visible either with 53 transclusions.) Armbrust The Homunculus 00:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. As I believe it is highly visible during the Olympics. I've also warned the IP user. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:22, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – LanguageXpert socks. SMS Talk 16:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request permanent pending changes revision. Page has a long history of temporary protection and vandalism in the periods it has not been protected. LT910001 (talk) 16:16, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:09, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:10, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection - Continually unconstructive edits by IP users. --Tærkast (Discuss) 15:38, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:05, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical element symbol templates

Template-editor: Appears NuclearWarfare protected these en masse (though Hydroxide was from DragonflySixtyseven). Requesting these so I am able to move them into other categories. I posted a message about this on NuclearWarfare's talk page but haven't heard back yet. meteor_sandwich_yum (talk) 05:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@NuclearWarfare: They don't seem to be used much (first two have no transclusions) anymore so I'm included to unprotect. What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callanecc (talk • contribs) 05:36, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Template protected Mark Arsten (talk) 01:04, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. Jingiby (talk) 19:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 21:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requesting long-term protection from IPs as this article and ones related to VeggieTales have been frequent targets for vandalism. One IP is currently serving a 2 year block. Recent IP hopper 70.36.* continues to submit unsourced media release dates. Quick double-checking shows no improvement over the current incorrect information.

Example: The article currently claims The Incredible Singing Christmas Tree was released July 19, 2002. IP user has changed it to September 20, 2005. Allmusic.com and Amazon say September 27, 2005. Getting warmer?
Example: Article currently claims VeggieTunes 4 was released May 10, 2004. User changed it to May 18, 2004. Allmusic.com lists it as October 5, 2004. Barnes and Noble lists October 5, 2004.

Anyhow, there are issues with verifiability, to say the least. Thank you and sorry for the ramble. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:28, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked.. 70.36.195.64/26 blocked for a month; if he switches to a new range, let me know and I'll block or protect as necessary. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 21:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Someone is removing content and adding contentious material. George Ho (talk) 07:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of two months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:50, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP users continue to revert changes without reason or per guideline. LADY LOTUS • TALK 14:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Please discuss this content issue at the talk page first before you request page protection in favour of your preferred version. This appears to be edit-warring from your side. De728631 (talk) 17:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Long-term magnet for vandals, highly visible article. Common vandalism involves random date changes, or just plain-old factual inaccuracies/blanking. Let's try PC first, that should be enough. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 10:20, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Gloss • talk 20:24, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@HJ Mitchell: How is it possible that there isn't enough recent disruptive activity here, 25 of the last 50 edits have been reverted as disruptive edits (in this month alone). The 25 edits coming from 13 different accounts/IPs. Gloss • talk 20:55, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My bad. Not sure how I missed that. : Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – as before, numerous IPs making the same edits repeatedly. DonIago (talk) 19:49, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:40, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. (t) Josve05a (c) 19:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:38, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Very recent and active IP BLP vandalism. Ivanvector (talk) 19:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Ponyo.. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by IPs. Egghead06 (talk) 18:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:27, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: This page (like others of its kind) is a constant subject to genre-warring and POV-driven removals of sourced content. I'm somewhat involved there so I'm not feeling comfortable with protecting the page myself from a recent upsurge in disruptive edits. De728631 (talk) 16:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:22, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Gunday (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

semi protection there is a whole sock drawer of accounts posting their personal protest about the issues and manner they are covered in the movie. Or perhaps just blocking the blatant socks. not sure which is easier with less collateral damage. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Make way for article via AfC. C679 15:02, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question: @Cloudz679: Are you referring to the AFC here? If so, the article contain almost the exact same information when it was deleted at AFD and doesn't seem to address the concerns of notability. Mike V • Talk 20:08, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
At the AfD he was deleted for not having played in the league, although he has managed to do so in the 2 and a half years since the last discussion. C679 21:45, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection Suspected sockpuppetry throughout the article (two IPs possibly the same person continue to add content without providing any sources). Have left warnings/messages on their talk pages. Rzxz1980 (talk) 15:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. De728631 (talk) 16:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite move protection: The page has been moved a number of times. The current name is the correct one. Jetstreamer Talk 15:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. See reliable sources like this and obvious photos. I don't think that an indefinite move protection is warranted but the current move-warring now has been stopped for one month. De728631 (talk) 16:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Page seems to be attracting a spate of vandalism. Lesion (talk) 13:37, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. De728631 (talk) 17:07, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:52, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. I'll probably regret this, but let's see how it goes with the new block. The page gets a reasonable number of constructive IP edits so I'd see how it goes. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:26, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection or Semi-protection: page is overrun by vandalism in recents weeks, both by IPs and new users with accounts created in order to vandalize the page. — Baseballtom (talk 1:01, 19 February 2014. (PST)

Declined, Sorry, but most of the IP edits I can see are constructive, and frankly right. GedUK  12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but that is not true at all. The IPs are deleting the intro and writing that his best most acclaimed films are "Snow Dogs" and "Norbit". Please reconsider or the page will quickly be ruined. Baseballtom (talk 9:06, 19 February 2014. (PST)

Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. In the past 30 days alone several IP edits have reverted, and all in all for the past year or so almost all IP edits have been reverted. Cadiomals (talk) 02:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Upgrade protection from pending to semi. Sudden burst in disruptive IP edits in the past days, nothing constructive. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:53, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Potentially explosive situation is developing on this article. One user is introducing edits which are disputed by several other users (see the "soap opera" on talk page) but the user in question seems to be continuing with his edits despite the disagreement. I suggest locking the page completely until the situation has diffused. I will also revert the article to a version prior to this whole charade started. Shokatz (talk) 05:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:55, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Again same as Ivan Gundulić. Another case of the same user against several other editors (including me) making non-consensus changes. I am all for WP:BOLD but this is ridiculous. Shokatz (talk) 05:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'm inclined to block, but I'll give protection a go first. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent disruptive editing by an IP hopper who keeps having their IPs blocked. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 09:50, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:42, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Variable IP doing vandalism. –HTD 09:42, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persitant changing IP edit warring. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 09:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Regarding the automated comment, the previous request resulted in IP editors being blocked, and was not "denied". However, blocks are useless in this case, as the disruptive editor engaging in edit warring on this page is an anonymous rotating IPv6 editor. Semiprotection would remedy this issue. --benlisquareT•C•E 10:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from ip. — ASDFGH =] talk? 08:37, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:46, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Continuous vandalism for the past two weeks by several IPs adding random names, NBA players in the "imports" section. -WayKurat (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Repeated highly offensive vandalism. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I'd rather shut it down completely then have them still in the page history. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:27, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Edit warring by multiple IPs to insert material in violation of WP:NPOV. Rivertorch (talk) 18:18, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. It looks like 68.187.210.197 is the only recent so warn them then report to AIV if they continue. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi. IP has been warned about edit-warring on another article. — kwami (talk) 11:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Looks like they've stopped and their trying to engage on their talk page. If they continue reverting report them to WP:ANEW. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:02, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Got WP:Sockpuppet IPs disrupting the deletion debate process. See what is stated in the deletion debate and follow this IP to the WP:ANI drama for more detail. Also see this other IP. The user apparently has a dynamic IP. Flyer22 (talk) 07:03, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:17, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The IP predictably followed me here and tampered with my above post. The IP also posted this bit that I reverted. Thanks, Mark. Flyer22 (talk) 07:21, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Abuse of pending changes privilege it has become tedious to decline them all. The last 14 edits (in less than two weeks) made by 13 different IPs or unautoconfirmed users have been declined. STATic message me! 05:22, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Several IPs have added unsourced details regarding this subjects death. A RS has yet to confirm any of this.LM2000 (talk) 04:56, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now confirmed but IP vandalism persists.LM2000 (talk) 05:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GorillaWarfare (talk) 06:38, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Revert after revert after revert... these editors need to be forced to discuss things at the talk page. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 00:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I'm involved so I'm not declining or accepting but what's happening is BRD. I made a change NE disagreed Demiurge reverted then I restored the version before my edit so could discuss without a change to the policy. We discussed and NE made a compromise edit. The same is happening with the next one, Epicgenius made an edit, Bbb disagreed and did the R in BRD. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, I don't think full protection is needed at this point, but let me know if the situation changes. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Revert after revert after revert... these editors need to be forced to discuss things at the talk page. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 00:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

{{RFPP}} It's been solved, there was a misunderstanding which has now been sorted out, which is pretty much what was written in the latest edit summary. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:02, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:Callanecc, this request relates to the entirety of the recent pattern of reverts, not just the most recent dispute. I would ask that you re-evaluate the situation and provide further reasoning for accepting or declining based on the preceding statement; otherwise, I will very likely add this request once more once it is removed from this page. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 01:13, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They're weeks apart so I'm not sure full protection is warranted (given it'd need to be long term to deal with a long term problem). I've killed my decline template so another admin can have a look though. Dogmaticeclectic, your threat to "add this request once more once it is removed from this page" suggests an attempt to make a point and game the system, please be cautious. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:Callanecc, my so-called "threat" was simply meant as a disincentive for you to ignore my request to re-evaluate the situation; I added it per my prior experience dealing with Wikipedia administrators. Your suggestions, on the other hand, border on WP:CIVIL violations. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 02:17, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, I don't think full protection is needed at this point, but let me know if the situation changes. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect the page to New Kids on the Blecch, the same way Party Posse redirects there. Armbrust The Homunculus 04:17, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Mark Arsten (talk) 04:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Armbrust The Homunculus 04:21, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Recreation of salted page Bubzbeauty. Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Can we prevent people from adding Telangana as a state until it is official that Telangana will be a state? These changes have been reverted three or four times now. —Largo Plazo (talk) 20:09, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of ten days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let me know if that isn't enough. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:17, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism in the course of the past week. FonEengIneeR7 talk 13:43, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:53, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: The subject (now meeting WP:GNG) has an article at Shanell (singer) that should be moved her to avoid the unnecessary dab, as she is the only subject that carries the "Shanell" title. STATic message me! 04:07, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done I've moved the page for you, for the future requests like this should go to WP:RM#Uncontroversial technical requests. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Or not so temporary. Long term vandalism. JNW (talk) 01:05, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It's been hit pretty hard in the last few months, so hopefully a few months of semi will calm it down again. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:22, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Two dozen edits in past month, almost all of it IP vandalism and reverts of same by bots and registered editors. Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 23:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Been hit hard recently so hopefully this will calm it down. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:23, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: User talk page archive which should not be edited for any reason. Thanks. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We can do that, but I'm curious about a rationale here. Nobody has disrupted that archive, and the chance that anyone will, is rare. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's a chance that a new user will try to start a thread on the archive page, despite the notice. Since the archive will never need to be edited again, there's no advantage to leaving it unprotected. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected. Ok, the explanation works for me. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Bizarre edit war with nonexistent ref insertion. . DBaK (talk) 21:55, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected.: full for one week by Amatulic. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Widr (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 20:48, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of dubious unsourced additions and vandalism. At the least the page needs pending changes. STATic message me! 20:08, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:19, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: I'm fairly sure that some to-ing and fro-ing at this article is at least of the WP:MEAT variety but, regardless, we need to stop the disruption and get people talking, as I requested at Talk:Charan#Unsourced_and_poorly_sourced_statements. They're ignoring the talk page and demonstrating a distinct lack of clue. Semi-protection might just nudge them in the right direction. Sitush (talk) 18:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move protection: There were two separate instances last week of this article being moved four or five times in rapid succession, including into User namespace and Wikipedia namespace, by an inexperienced editor. In the interest of not having this occur again (which required several technical-assistance moves and cross-namespace redirect deletion in order to remedy), I'd like to request move protection for this article. Chubbles (talk) 17:55, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism to a WP:BLP. STATicmessage me! 17:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 20:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

'long term semi protection - controversial BLP subject to long term abuse by flamers calling him a cult leader and not quite as significant efforts by his follows to present a hagiography. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:29, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected Mark Arsten (talk) 17:42, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Disruptive dubious unsourced addition and speculation by anon IP editors and new users. STATic message me! 17:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:41, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Two IP editors edit warring with a user. User has started a discussion on the talk page but none of the IPs are participating in it and reinserting content that appears to be a case of Source Falsification. Also per ARBCOM authorized Discretionary Sanctions an admin has put this article under 1RR, so I suggest to force the IPs to the talk page this article should be semi protected. SMS Talk 15:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:29, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Long-term semi-protection: IP mess has resumed now since previous semi-protections. Brandmeistertalk 14:58, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:91.211.169.155 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Disable editing by user: Blocked IP, now vandalizing the block template. JNW (talk) 14:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Semi-protection: - I realize it's unusual to protect a DRV, or any XfD page, but look at the history; it is being infested with socks, IPs, and impersonators of other Wikipedia editors. Tarc (talk) 14:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Yunshui.. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bon Jovi, and songs and albums by the band

Temporary semi-protection: Unfortunately, this is a wide-reaching problem. An IP-jumping troublemaker (or group of them) continually seeks to change the genre listed for the band and its songs and albums to heavy metal (which is a disambiguation page, the correct target being heavy metal music). There has been much discussion up and down Talk:Bon Jovi about what genre the band and its works fall into, and there is at least a general consensus that "heavy metal" is not correct for the band generally, or for most of its works. Even in those cases where specific songs have been properly labeled as "heavy metal", the IP editor or editors involved in this activity have, without explanation, removed other listed genres, changed the correct article link to the incorrect disambiguation link, and removed sources (see [34], [35]. bd2412 T 14:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, Bon Jovi is already protected, you'll have to list the others individually. Please only list articles that have been subject to repeated recent disruption. I'm hesitant to protect articles if there has only been a single revert in the past week. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:34, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:03, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:44, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism by various IP's DVdm (talk) 11:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.
Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Vandal with dynamic IP. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 06:26, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. I've put a small rangeblock in place, let me know if problems continue. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Long-term problems with unexplained deletion of sourced content etc. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:58, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:24, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

20 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – High level of IP vandalism to this article this month (unclear why). Dwpaul Talk 20:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1001 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I would once again like to ask for indefinite page protection, as each time the protection runs out we are struck by vandalism to this high-profile page. CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 11:11, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:16, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. satellizer (talk - contributions) 09:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.
Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Long-term problem with linkspamming/promotion by IPs. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. George Ho (talk) 09:34, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: frequent recent anon IP vandalism. LibStar (talk) 06:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:19, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: BLP violation issues affecting subject and another living person being discussed at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Cara Delevingne. HelenOnline 14:19, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi protection I don't know this band that well but this page is having vandalism issues and having their genre messed with a lot. Kind of annoying. Sorry if the format for this entry is messed up. I wasn't too sure how submitting a report worked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Second Skin (talk • contribs) 09:33, 20 February 2014 (UTC)‎[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Not enough to warrant semi or pending changes protection, but I've watchlisted the article and I'll keep an eye on it for a while and see what happens. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:20, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite template protection: Highly visible template – Please lower protection level so that I may answer the edit request. Thank you. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 17:09, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ping me if you want it lowered further....Lectonar (talk) 17:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Anon thinks that some referenced and relevant material does not belong in this article and so reverts and used personal attacks. Originally at California Clásico and now here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. by User:Mark Arsten—Bagumba (talk) 08:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Chelsea Manning (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protect. I'm very sure it will be very common for people to use the talk page as a forum saying that they hate the way Chelsea is being thought of as a female. Georgia guy (talk) 00:33, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IMO there is no need for semi protection at this time. Two kinds of pork (talk) 00:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's perfectly reasonable content discussions involving IPs and the newly registered and there's plenty of admin eyes on it already to revert or protect if needed. tutterMouse (talk) 08:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:14, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – although only vandalised once in last two weeks, persistent vandalism over months. Widefox; talk 00:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Sorry just not enough to warrant semi or pending changes, if the same amount of activity as was in December returns please re-report and ask for semi or pending changes. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:29, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: third creation of Bali PW page previous incarnation was please see User talk:BaliPW and Balipw . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. GedUK  12:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: persistently recreated. . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:45, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected. GedUK  12:28, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism.[36][37]. Especially by 2.186.172.122 And I am constantly to revert his actions. Hanibal911 (talk) 10:38, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Ruby Murray 10:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: For some reason, this article has attracted a whole lot of POV editing and editwarring from IP editors in the last few months. StAnselm (talk) 08:47, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:31, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Unsourced changes. —Lightsout (talk) 22:51, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Unsourced changes. —Lightsout (talk) 22:50, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:23, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism.[38]. Especially by 92.18.15.213 and 92.19.189.24. Constantly have to rollback to fix it. Timelezz (talk) 21:50, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:03, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Multiple users continue to add unsorced blp information. . Dcheagle • talk • contribs 07:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. (semi for one month). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 03:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:20, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs have repeatedly removed a "tone" maintenance tag without attempting to resolve it.  Mbinebri  talk ← 01:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:24, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Downgrade to PC per Talk:Disaster_Movie#Protected.3F.3F. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 01:38, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Vandalism and dubious unsourced additions by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 06:08, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Bagumba (talk) 08:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary move protection: Move-protect the article until the deletion discussion is closed. Jetstreamer Talk 00:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator EdJohnston.. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:04, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: The page isn't meant to be protected. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 02:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:59, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Abuse of pending changes privilege, declining all the vandalism has become tedious. STATic message me! 00:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:41, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Edit warring, IP editor apparently unwilling to join discussion on talk page. McGeddon (talk) 22:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:39, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – more of the same - multiple IPs editing disruptively. DonIago (talk) 19:55, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, only one edit since last protection expired. Come back if it picks up again. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:41, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – How many more violated pages of Bon Jovi albums?. George Ho (talk) 19:46, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. George Ho (talk) 19:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:37, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. George Ho (talk) 19:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent addition of inappropriate BLP-categories by non-responsive single purpose shifting IP. See User talk:39.48.149.191 DVdm (talk) 18:06, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:26, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

21 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and "amusing" edits.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I think a longer time is needed. Bearian (talk) 19:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The Malaysian vandal has struck again on this article just after a recent protection template was lifted. Areaseven (talk) 14:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mike V • Talk 16:45, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 19:28, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism Krychek (talk) 17:53, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – block evasion posting from an ip. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:44, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Floquenbeam.. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever's appropriate. Persistent vandalism, apparent perennial target. Sportfan5000 (talk) 05:21, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Looks like there are also a couple of disputes going on at the moment which this won't fix as all accounts are autoconfirmed, however it will deal (as well as PC does) with the long term vandalism. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:15, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Twice restored from a redirect into an infobox, despite the consensus of an AfD being explicitly to keep this as a redirect. No evidence of notability has come forward to back the change. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:29, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – not yet persistent, but based on previous disruption by this IP-hopping agenda-pushing user leading to the protection of similar pages, it'd be better to protect now. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:42, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – not yet persistent, but based on previous disruption by this IP-hopping agenda-pushing user leading to the protection of similar pages, it'd be better to protect now. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:42, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: Repeated creation of page about non-notable event. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Mike V • Talk 16:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:150.176.227.115 (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Modify block settings Blocked user continuing to make disruptions on talk page. NHRHS2010 RIP M.H. (1994-2014) 14:41, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. Already done by blocking admin. NHRHS2010 RIP M.H. (1994-2014) 14:42, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done For the bot. Mike V • Talk 16:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Jinkinson talk to me 04:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:31, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever's appropriate. Persistent vandalism, apparent perennial target. Sportfan5000 (talk) 04:56, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:28, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Ridiculous level of IP vandalism. I'm suprised this article isn't protected already. BassHero55 (talk) 02:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection: Activity has slowed down since the page was protected in 2012. Subject is also not very notable lately, so vandalism is unlikely. Original protector isn't very active, so bringing this here. Gloss • talk 04:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. It still gets more than 100 views a day so we'll see how PC goes before trying unprotection. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:28, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Consistent disruptive editing, and most recently IP vandalism. AndyBeaux (talk) 12:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. It's borderline because there's a few constructive IP edits too, but the same recurring problem with the sourcing of ratings is probably just about enough. And have corrected the article title in the request. GedUK  12:31, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Request one week of page protection; multiple attempts at vandalism by varying IP editors. LT910001 (talk) 11:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:26, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism in the course of the past two weeks. FonEengIneeR7 talk 09:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:29, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent unsourced additions about a collaboration with another artist (the "source" used in the other artist's article categorically did not back up the claim). Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:56, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 48 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent and disruptive edits by IP users. TheOnlyOne12 (talk) 07:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Vandalism and additions of WP:OR, at the least it needs pending changes. STATic message me! 07:07, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Deliberate factual errors are introduced in the article by IPs, possibly by banned users. Amartyabag TALK2ME 06:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This article has been semi-d before. Yet again, since the semi expired, anons have been tag-teaming to puff up their caste. WP:GS/Caste is not a lot of use against anons but it does provide a bit more leeway to slap an indefinite semi-protection on the article. Please do so. Sitush (talk) 07:12, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Let's see how that works first. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:50, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Additions of spam links and WP:OR by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 04:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:25, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Becoming a magnet for IP vandalism, after coming in second at the olympics. TJRC (talk) 00:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined It's a current event so I'd except a pretty high edit rate including some vandalism. However given that there are some constructive IP edits and that pending changes won't work I'd rather leave unprotected unless it gets worse. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:32, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Sudden spike in goofy vandalism related to tumblr/fandoms. Ruarc (talk) 02:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection Persistent vandalism – IP accounts continuing to add unsourced information to a residency page of one of the world's most-popular music entertainers. livelikemusic my talk page! 01:42, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi protection: Persistent vandalism – And sockpuppetry. Edit-warring, blanking, adding unsourced information. . Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 01:29, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:16, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Complete Unprotection: Article was semi-protected almost three years ago for vandalism. Given that the article isn't highly important, I'd like to ask that we could give it another chance and remove the protection. The original blocker retired about a month ago, so I'm unable to contact him. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 04:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:11, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-Protection: A user by the name of 72.223.56.123, continuously adds a brief reminder of films not included in the album itself. [1]. Here's the proof. I will like to request a semi-protection of this article before anyone adds that line again. ACMEWikiNet (talk) 00:47, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:51, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – She won Olympic gold, and some people are not happy about it. Iselilja (talk) 23:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Ronhjones.. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:47, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protect for a few days: A dynamic IP is repeatedly adding defamatory material about living persons. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:31, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

22 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Still more vandalism by Malaysian IP hopper. Areaseven (talk) 02:12, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary Full Protection Edit war. -- Scorpion0422 00:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined It looks like one IP is causing most of the issues, so it would be better to seek sanctions against the IP instead of protecting at this point. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:20, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Ongoing disruption by anonymous IP repeatedly adding unsourced rumour. GliderMaven (talk) 20:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The IP editor is on a dynamic IP though, and has been doing it repeatedly for a couple of months.GliderMaven (talk) 01:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:39, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full-protection: Content dispute, contentious. Protect for a few days to enforce discussion. 88.104.19.233 (talk) 05:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, there's a bit less reverting at this point than I like to see when full protecting. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:02, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism--same person using different IP addresses to vandalize the article. Dan56 (talk) 02:19, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:08, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism--same person using different IP addresses to vandalize the article. Dan56 (talk) 02:18, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi- or full-protection persistent edit-warring over the inclusion of Stefan Molyneux. Frietjes (talk) 00:05, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:10, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Users are adding Telangana but it is not official yet. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 15:54, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 07:08, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Article attracts ongoing promotional edits incl. copyvio cut & paste from company website incl. [39], [40], [41] — Brianhe (talk) 15:44, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, both accounts are autoconfirmed, so semi-protection won't help here. It would probably be a better idea to seek sanctions against them. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:33, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Really? You don't think semi protection would help dissuade SPAs like HindujaGrp (talk · contribs), Hinduja Group (talk · contribs), 203.194.99.37 (talk · contribs), SMM123485 (talk · contribs), Pats10110 (talk · contribs), NileshSingh01 (talk · contribs)? Each one of them began (and in most cases ended) a non-helpful editing career with this article. — Brianhe (talk) 04:26, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protection is inappropriate unless there has been recent disruption from IPs or new accounts. There have only been a couple disruptive editors in the past three months or so, and they're both autoconfirmed now. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Disruptive vandalism hopper --2602:306:CDFC:19D0:68D4:F50F:45B4:FB26 (talk) 20:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:42, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 20:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, the user who was edit warring was blocked, and though he's unblocked now he hasn't continued the edit war. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:41, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Disruptive IP user continues to revert sourced series end date to further his personal POV. Requesting 48 hour protection. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:11, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, it's only one IP so going to WP:AN3 would be a better idea. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:39, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Disruptive IP hopper genre warrior. STATic message me! 19:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. -- I've placed a small rangeblock for a week, let me know if there are more issues. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:38, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:52, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Eh, why not indefinite. There's literally no reason for anyone other than me to edit it... –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:50, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism, IP user is believed to be an editor that was temporarily blocked for edit warring. IP address registers to Charlotesville, Va, and given past history, more edit warring is likely. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:46, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP-hopping POV-pushing editor. Jinkinson talk to me 20:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

23 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – some IP editors (possibly the same person with dynamic IP) keep reverting the edits of registered editors, and in so doing are removing sourced content. See Bicester Town railway station below. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)  Done semi-protected for 2 weeks. Mjroots (talk) 20:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected (for the bot) tutterMouse (talk)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – some IP editors (possibly the same person with dynamic IP) keep reverting the edits of registered editors, and in so doing are removing sourced content. I would protect the page myself, but I'm one person who's been reverted, so I'm involved. More at WT:UKRAIL#Line closed for upgrade. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done semi-protected for 2 weeks. Mjroots (talk) 20:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected (for the bot) tutterMouse (talk)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – My user page. (Until 3 March 2014). (t) Josve05a (c) 11:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Connormah. Mifter (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Just released film. Requesting temporary semi-protection. Tito☸Dutta 14:44, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 Month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 18:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. (t) Josve05a (c) 12:56, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Acroterion. Mike V • Talk 18:51, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. (t) Josve05a (c) 12:56, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Edgar181. Mike V • Talk 18:51, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – The main case page is currently protected from editing so there is no reason that the archive should not as well. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 12:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Mifter (talk) 18:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User request. Alayak (talk) 16:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Mifter (talk) 17:10, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. SMS Talk 15:47, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 17:22, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite move protection: Page title dispute/move warring. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 15:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected indefinitely. Mifter (talk) 18:02, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Editors cannot keep up with POV pushing on K2, nor checking correctness of new data. A short semi-protection would be welcome. —hike395 (talk) 17:53, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 07:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP violations of WP:DERRY. Murry1975 (talk) 17:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Mifter (talk) 07:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Long-term magnet, highly visible and controversial figure. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 07:16, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recommending long-term protection from IPs and non-autoconfirmed users. Article is a hot-spot for sockpuppetry (Specifically FanforClarl aka Unorginal). Nickelodeon in general is an active target for child vandals. Unorginal flare-up a few days after protection lifted here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - Nickelodeon in general may be a target, but this article seems to be quiet and have a slow enough edit rate to not warrant protection. Mifter (talk) 07:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This page seems to be a magnet for IP vandalism, getting a hit every week or two. Sometimes ClueBot NG catches it (Thanks, ClueBot!), other times it must be manually reverted. ke4roh (talk) 16:37, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 07:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 13:32, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 07:22, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The subject or someone related to them (one account and two IPs so far) insists on editing and messing up this article, despite repeated pleas to stop. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:08, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Mifter (talk) 07:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: IP persistently adding conspiracist/POV fringe content. Alexbrn talk|contribs|COI 19:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 07:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Disruptive editing by new editor. SMS Talk 19:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Mifter (talk) 07:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: BLP policy violations. Smtchahal (talk) 19:05, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - I'm on the fence with this one, there aren't many edits, and I'm not sure PC is really needed, if the situation picks up though, PC could defiantly be used here. Mifter (talk) 07:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 06:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 06:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. - One or two instances of vandalism in the 2-3 weeks since protection has expired is not enough to justify reinstating semiprotection. Mifter (talk) 06:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 06:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 06:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 06:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 06:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 06:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Again. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:56, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator JamesBWatson. Mifter (talk) 07:21, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

temporary full protection - a social media campaign protesting the movie [42] has stacked the IMDB ratings and now the campaign is moving on to insert that and other views into the article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:12, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - In addition to the Semi protection, this should help keep things cleaned up. Mifter (talk) 07:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Indefinite full protection: this is a retired user. Junvfr ツ (talk) 18:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected indefinitely. Mifter (talk) 07:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – BuickCenturyDriver. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 16:55, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator JamesBWatson. Mifter (talk) 07:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Anonymous (IP) users keep removing or vandalizing the political statements section of this article. Request semi-protection of the page. . Engelo (talk) 12:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 07:22, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Additions of unsourced content, WP:OR and vandalism by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 06:51, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 06:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: There has been persistent vandalism – Been protected earlier. This has an ongoing issue and fringes upon WP:BLP policy.

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. Mifter (talk) 06:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Contract agreed upon, but not executed. A physical exam is pending. Per this source, "Cruz was slated to fly in from the Dominican Republic on Saturday and drive up from Miami in the evening to the club's Spring Training complex. A physical is scheduled for either Sunday or early Monday morning.". – Muboshgu (talk) 18:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 07:05, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Almost all recent new/IP edits are unhelpful. Jinkinson talk to me 04:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 06:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – these things always get a lot of vand. Smarkflea (talk) 00:44, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 Month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 06:50, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long term vandalism. . ///EuroCarGT 23:01, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 Month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 06:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 16:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already unprotected by administrator JamesBWatson.

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. STATic message me! 22:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. by Vianello, I'm not convinced that the general level of vandalism other than that IP is sufficient to warrant protection, but I'll keep an eye on it. In the meantime, Everything Is Awesome. --j⚛e deckertalk 22:23, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 14:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Please consider re-applying if and when vandalism resumes. Diannaa (talk) 19:54, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism--same person using different IP addresses to vandalize the article. They are trying to change facts about movie budget from 35 to 15 crore, changing box office verdict from flop to average or hit although it is declared flop by all major box office sites. Kajol3000 (talk) 12:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined These edits are being made by an autoconfirmed user, not an IP, so semi protection won't make any difference. Please discuss the content on the article talk page. Diannaa (talk) 20:00, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Been protected earlier. Every once in a while, some IP comes, posts something about someone's excreta. I think indef semi should be fine. --. Rsrikanth05 (talk) 19:09, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 22:42, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent addition of inappropriate categories by wide range of single purpose IP's. See list at User talk:39.48.43.78 DVdm (talk) 13:37, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – An IP user constantly adds a duplicate link. Evidently, advertising is his purpose. Codename Lisa (talk) 23:30, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:42, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Page is barely out of a three-month semi-protect and is being targeted again by IPs. Can we get semi-protection for one year?--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 22:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 20:08, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

24 February 2014

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – mostly COI edits/etc. ViperSnake151  Talk  17:40, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 18:45, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. The longer the better, this is a frequent victim of IP vandalism. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 17:01, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 18:41, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism by anon IP editors to a BLP. STATic message me! 15:09, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Semi-protected indefinitely. - Wow the bot was fast there... Mifter (talk) 18:40, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs keep removing certain plot details, claiming that they are spoilers. Obviously, this isn't permitted per WP:SPOILER. Normally I would request only pending changes, but this has been a problem for about a week now. Experimenting with the locking the page for a few days would probably be a good idea. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:20, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The plot summary has been expanded by Ryulong (talk · contribs) to make it less of a teaser and more of an actual summary. I think it is better to wait and see if the new addition, along with the editor notes left by the OP, will take. IMO, the removal of plot details hasn't reached the point of being disruptive yet. 24.149.117.220 (talk) 12:40, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined, Let's see how it pans out. Relist if necessary GedUK  13:45, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. This NASCAR racer was recently the winner of the 2014 Daytona 500. MegaGardevoir68 (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:54, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. MartinJohns (talk) 03:52, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:39, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it has. GedUK  13:57, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, now it has! GedUK  14:01, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary move protection: Featured on the Main Page. Too many moves for an article. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 03:02, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Seems to have settled on an agreed title now. GedUK  13:33, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: An IP is constantly reverting to an extremely promotional version of the article. A message on their talk page has yielded no results. Article has a history of COI editing and there are rumors of paid editing, so this would help deter unhelpful IP editing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 03:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:35, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent sockpuppetry. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 02:51, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:33, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent sockpuppetry. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 02:50, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:33, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent sockpuppetry. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 02:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:34, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent sockpuppetry. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 02:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I've gone for semi, because when they do edit, it's very heavy, and there's also nothing obviously wrong with it, so it's quite likely it would get approved at PC, and if it does get declined then it'll get repeatedly added, which will unbalance the reviewers. GedUK  13:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Repeated removal of sourced information by newly-registered users. --Երևանցի talk 02:05, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:23, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Should've been protected before (3 IPs posting the same unsourced information over 4 days should've been enough for SP), and now another IP has wandered into the fray with an even worse set of edits. Shut it down, please. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 07:56, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:10, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. SMS Talk 02:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High amount of IP vandalism. Andrew Henderson 00:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full disputes over controversial info on the BLP. 88.104.19.233 (talk) 04:50, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark Arsten: Your protection? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Callanecc, no longer needed. Mark removed the protection. --NeilN talk to me 17:08, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Already protected. and Already unprotected.. For the bot. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 21:04, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:K6ka and User_talk:K6ka

Indefinite semi-protection: Request on own user space. Those subpages are starting to become a pain to monitor. Would be nice if I only had two pages to worry about. Don't protect my main userpage (User:K6ka) - I like the free reverts I get when vandals target that page. K6ka (talk | contribs) 01:34, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Mike V • Talk 02:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: The number of IP edits on this page that blatantly defy the maintenance tags and the manual of style is terrifying. I'd like to see this article protected so those who contribute usefully don't have their edits destroyed. Bailmoney27 talk 23:51, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 00:21, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple IPs making same edit that is POV. EvergreenFir (talk) 23:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 00:21, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 21:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 00:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent unsourced additions. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:10, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 00:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and edits by Here 4 some fun. Many untrue and discriminatory content.

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. and User(s) blocked. - Mifter (talk) 00:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – page has quite the history of vandalism. K6ka (talk | contribs) 23:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 00:20, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: IP disruption has resumed after unprotection. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 22:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 00:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – User retired. Persistent vandalism. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 20:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Mifter (talk) 00:26, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The page has been undergoing persistent vandalisms in the last few weeks. It is a top-importance, very crucial article for WP:Physics. As such it needs semi-protection at the least. King Of The Wise (talk) 18:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Indefinite semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked – repeated removal of block template . Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) re-blocked with talk page editing disallowed by Mifter. Mifter (talk) 17:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Roving IP edit warring known-to-be false info to article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:37, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mifter (talk) 18:51, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Roving IP edit warring known-to-be false info to article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:36, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Mifter (talk) 18:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. --Jakob (talk) 14:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 18:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semiprotection. Due to increased attention with the ongoing NFL Combine, the level of vandalism increased, too. Please semi-protect until after the Combine, that is 2014-02-26 00:00 UTC. Thanks. --bender235 (talk) 13:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 18:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. BattleshipMan (talk) 17:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 18:56, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

25 February 2014

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. GZWDer (talk) 12:24, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:57, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Being used to avoid salting at Demetrice Jackson and Demetrice jackson. The subject's article (which is always created by promo/affiliated accounts) has been deleted twice at AfD. STATic message me! 04:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – BLP violations of article and talk page, talk page needs edit summaries redacted and comments refactored that describe unsubstantiated allegations. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peter_Ludlow&diff=595828987&oldid=562300244 as per this]. Flat Out let's discuss it 04:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. and Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. - Mifter (talk) 04:44, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator comment) with respect, the last 5 edits have needed reversion due to serious BLP violations. Flat Out let's discuss it 05:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Herald talk with me 03:47, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 04:45, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 03:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 04:47, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Anshul3Bansal (talk) 02:27, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. —Darkwind (talk) 03:56, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated. Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected indefinitely. Mifter (talk) 04:45, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism, long term. JNW (talk) 03:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 04:46, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Request temporary page protection of the BLP article of Harold Ramis who recently died. Article has been subject to numerous speculative edits, and vandalism - not uncommon for the article of someone who has recently died. In light of this, temporary page protection is requested. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ② 02:44, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 04:48, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated removal of BLP Prod tag by article creator. E Wing (talk) 20:20, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined Take the article to WP:AFD if you want it deleted, or another sysop can more fully protect it. Bearian (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent IP vandalism. One has been blocked, only to be replaced by another who makes the same edits without explanation. Tiller54 (talk) 01:57, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 03:55, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure. Editing disputes, multiple parties. Sportfan5000 (talk) 00:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 03:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Just came off page protection yesterday and has already attracted a ton of vandalism. Requesting temp protection through the next month, when the game will be released. czar ♔ 23:54, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This covers up to about two weeks after the game's release. —Darkwind (talk) 03:46, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected until the end of the AfD. —Darkwind (talk) 03:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent IP and newly registred users'content dispute/edit warring. Jingiby (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. —Darkwind (talk) 03:33, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced additions and changes by anon IPs and new accounts. STATic message me! 21:33, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 00:16, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Same content removal from various IPs/socks has been going on since September 2012. Recommend long-term semi-protection (6 months to a year) or pending changes protection. — MusikAnimal talk 18:38, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. & Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. - Mifter (talk) 19:04, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I respect your decision, however I feel I should clarify that of the past four times this page was protected, it was vandalized within 96 hours of the protection having expired. In addition, the vandal in question is an IP hopper who has also abused multiple accounts to circumvent the blocking policy. Either way I'm watching it, so if further need arises I shall report here again. Thanks — MusikAnimal talk 19:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: IPs and even a few registered users continue to add unsourced, or improperly sourced series end dates in spite of numerous notices, etc. Requesting protection for a months or so from IPs and non-autoconfirmed users. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:50, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 19:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Can we give this page a bit of a break from the persistent vandalism please? It's a drag trying to keep it straight. Anyone would think people dislike him ... Thanks. . DBaK (talk) 19:21, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 19:35, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Long-term persisent IP vandalism from a wide rande of IPs. Vandalism resumed very shortly after last temporary semi-protection in November 2013. Frequent victim of vandalism due to its popularity (4,500 views per day). Jklamo (talk) 17:41, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mifter (talk) 19:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. --Mdann52talk to me! 13:31, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined - Doesn't appear to be an edit war, just an anon adding unsourced content (and being reverted). Best, Mifter (talk) 18:36, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection, at the least: Persistent disruption recently resumed. JNW (talk) 13:01, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Mifter (talk) 18:33, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

26 February 2014

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent WP:Sockpuppetry at this article by 211.30.163.86 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). No matter how many times it is explained to him, does not seem to understand that he, not just his registered Wikipedia account (User:Lionhead99), is indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia. Therefore, he is also evading his indefinite block at other Wikipedia articles. He may also be pretending not to understand that he, not just his registered Wikipedia account, is indefinitely blocked, from editing Wikipedia. Flyer22 (talk) 09:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. GedUK  12:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: As with many new movies that are genre or youthful-skewing, this one suffers from daily IP-editor plot-bloat that violates WP:FILMPLOT and introduces bad, convoluted writing. Just for a couple of weeks till the movie's newness dies down. Tenebrae (talk) 18:47, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I know it's frustrating, but there's also plenty of constructive IP edits, and indeed some of the plot bloat is from confirmed users. It might be better to add a hidden note to try and discourage it. GedUK  12:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi protection: Persistent vandalism. Recent death of a former living person. MegaGardevoir68 (talk) 18:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, I can't see any vandalism. A few unsourced edits but they've all been sourced now anyway. Can't see any need for protection. GedUK  12:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Persistent vandalism, a certain user keeps vandalizing the page, first using an IP address, and now with two accounts. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:32, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This page has been protected multiple times and yet IPs still continue to vandalise. This page was last semi protected for over a year and yet not much has changed. It would be nice to see an end to vandalism. JZCL 18:31, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. IPs also have provided some constructive edits. Overall it's quite low. However, pending changes may be an option in the future. GedUK  12:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some group editors doing syndicate editing ande redirecting films and movies page OMICS Creations to Scientific Publishing OMICS Publishing Group. CU is required and/or investigation required about these people who are representing as experts but behaving as culprits. This is a Preposterous activity at WP. I request sock poppet investigation and full protection for this article.Movieking007 (talk) 06:57, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, user blocked as sock. GedUK  12:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: WP:RIP. Ross HillTalk to me! 00:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected.. GedUK  12:24, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 21:44, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:30, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Persistent BLP violations by anonymous editors adding unsourced editorial content. Nmillerche (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:29, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: IPs and new users (I suspect are the same editor) removing sourced content from article even after warning and refusing to participate in discussion.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:22, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by another admin. GedUK  12:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of unsourced info being added that needs reviewing/reverting... JMHamo (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected. by another admin. GedUK  12:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There seem to be some who dislike him and are letting it be known on this page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:42, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistant vandalism, which resumed shortly after existing protection on the article expired. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Two editors have recently reverted my removal of unsourced content, contrary to WP: PROVEIT. Want to avoid an edit war over this. . El Chivo 2 (talk) 18:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This editor is edit-warring against several others, and is the only person edit-warring on the article, having made the same edit three times already today. It's a bit much for them to then request protection in order to force in their preferred version. RolandR (talk) 22:18, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  12:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 06:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. GedUK  13:58, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Connormah (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (1 month). tutterMouse (talk) 08:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Connormah (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (1 month). tutterMouse (talk) 08:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:54, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Connormah (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (1 month). tutterMouse (talk) 08:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:53, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected by Connormah (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (1 month). tutterMouse (talk) 08:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism immediately returning after previous protection's expiration. Mz7 (talk) 21:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: continuous joke edits and vandalism. Please someone semi-protect this page until after the NFL Combine hype is over, i.e. 24 hrs. --bender235 (talk) 17:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Article has a long history of garbage edits, was last protected for 1 year. Zad68 05:07, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Unconstructive editing. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 03:07, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article has seen some recent vandalism, in the past month, most of the edits to this article have been reverted as vandalism. Gloss • talk 17:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Zad68 04:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some group editors doing syndicate editing ande redirecting films and movies page OMICS Creations to Scientific Publishing OMICS Publishing Group. CU is required and/or investigation required about these people who are representing as experts but behaving as culprits. This is a Preposterous activity at WP. I request sock poppet investigation and full protection for this article.Movieking007 (talk) 06:55, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:11, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Non stop IP vandalism. ACMEWikiNet (talk) 20:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 20:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Persistent BLP violations from a long time by ip editors. . Darkesthoursoflife († • ©) 16:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bearian (talk) 20:31, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Article has been getting a lot of rambling personal essays from a shifting IP address lately. McGeddon (talk) 16:48, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:20, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. SMS Talk 16:03, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:18, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Problems coming from not autoconfirmed accounts, IP#s, Jack Brouder nonsense.... — This lousy T-shirt — (talk) 15:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:16, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Herald talk with me 12:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong assumption by a admin.Herald talk with me 15:34, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Pending-changes protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Anon with an anti-LGBT bias is reporting this musician as dead with a "source" that fails verification. The story also has suppositions. Alternately. block anon, but only given two warnings. Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:50, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. However, it looks as though the IP address may be some sort of proxy or web host. If the trouble re-starts I will be willing to protect the article. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:21, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

27 February 2014

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous vandalism since the protection wore off on 15 February. Diannaa (talk) 20:26, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism.

Declined I'm not seeing a high level of recent vandalism, am I missing something? --j⚛e deckertalk 17:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. BrokenMirrors123 (talk) 15:17, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Thanks for the thought, but it's not really necessary - my talkpage is a helpful magnet for identifying new socks, and I don't want to prevent IP editors from talking to me unless I have to. If it starts to get on my nerves, I can always protect it myself. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Declined per Yunshui's wishes. --j⚛e deckertalk 17:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Anna (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 20:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Anna (talk) 19:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism in the last few days (please scroll to older versions of this page, those on Feb 24 and Feb 27). Quenhitran (talk) 16:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 20:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Google Doodle in the US, subject to persistent vandalism until Feb 28th. — MusikAnimal talk 16:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Favonian (talk) 18:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Dynamic IP's vandalizing article. NeilN talk to me 16:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – I requested semi-protection yesterday, which was denied. But an ongoing edit war has been occurring over a table on the page which a few days of full protection and forced conversation could help take care of. Gloss • talk 16:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 20:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Repeatedly recreated at numerous similar titles, see Sockpuppet investigations for User:Johngalea24. Boleyn (talk) 07:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 00:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – For the same reason that Phillipine Syndicate was protected, in case the sock team figures out that that version's misspelled. —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create protection: Repeatedly recreated – This title has been used twice to by-pass create protection at Thierry Bin. Sir Sputnik (talk) 06:43, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creation protected Diannaa (talk) 03:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: against assorted, continuous IP vandalism through January and February. Anna (talk) 16:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 50 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. --j⚛e deckertalk 16:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Please restore protection. The gross anti-Semitic vandalism resumed almost immediately upon expiration of the previous protection period. Hertz1888 (talk) 15:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Yunshui 雲‍水 15:40, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know if some here thinks that List of personalities on The Weather Channel needs to be Protected, I have tried to stop IP users from adding false people saying things that aren't true. All i can say is that it is a lot of Vandalism. --ACase0000 (talk) 06:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Repeated vandalism from an IP-hopper making false connections between the studio and Disney. Freshh! (talk) 04:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:09, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Repeated vandalism from an IP-hopper making false connections between the studio and Disney. Freshh! (talk) 04:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:07, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Still high level of IP vandalism, removing sourced material, replacing it with unsourced text etc. I don't want to have to log in to Wikipedia every other night to revert it. Cecil Huber (talk) 22:49, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary PC-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 21:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: BLP vandalism, possibly due to greater public exposure related to upcoming elections in May. HelenOnline 09:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Various IP addresses are repeatedly adding back copied and pasted content from the university's website which has already been removed. . EdwardH (talk) 08:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – After the major clean up of paid advocacy on this article, and meat puppetry that occurred during the XfD of related POV fork articles (e.g. Dean Andrew Kantis), this article seems to have experienced a consistent level of POV editing and vandalism from IPs. Lesion (talk) 13:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 09:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent edit war. --Almasworld (talk) 06:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Very severe vandalism mixed in with helpful edits. STATic message me! 05:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Persistent vandalism. Jim1138 (talk) 05:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. JNW (talk) 01:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 01:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistently high level of vandalism from IPs and new users, apparently related to prominence of subject in Black History Month. Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs adding unsourced additions.  [[ axg // ✉ ]] 22:43, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:43, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protection: Highly visible template. Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 21:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protected CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:40, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistant vandalism in the past few days. The subject matter reached international headlines on 22 February 2014, and vandalism has been on the rise. Some of the vandalism has even gone undetected by the article's watchers. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 21:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mz7 (talk) 21:00, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:26, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection: I would like to have my user page fully edit and fully move protected. Thank you. -TheGeneralUser (talk) 20:46, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism and dubious unsourced additions by anon IP editors and new users immediately following the end of protection. STATic message me! 20:43, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:23, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Snowboarding has been getting a fair bit of vandalism the past few weeks. This past week especially, though the weeks before that as well. All problematic edits I noticed were either by IPs or by the occasional non-(auto-)confirmed user. Just about all edits since the 20th, were either test edits and/or vandalism, or reverts of aforementioned edits. . AddWittyNameHere (talk) 20:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Persistent vandalism by 78.177.91.79, 78.172.109.243, 78.177.100.215, 78.177.101.148, 78.177.116.200, 78.177.80.248, 78.177.35.114. Dwpaul Talk 19:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Widr (talk) 19:19, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – On-going revert war. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Sergecross73. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Hirolovesswords (talk) 18:43, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:09, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism.  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 3 months by Cindamuse (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) tutterMouse (talk) 07:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indef full prot Repeatedly the target of an attempted WP:CUTPASTE page move. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 10:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Abuse of pending changes by anon IPs, reverting all the pending edits has become tedious. STATic message me! 17:47, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 09:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Some edit warring and IP vandalism. Gloss • talk 17:16, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I'm not seeing enough vandalism to justify protection. Please try to get a discussion going on the talk page regarding the inclusion of the table. There's been no talk page edits since August. Diannaa (talk) 03:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Long-term vandalism magnet, mostly slow burning. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 10:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There's been vo vandalism for a month. Diannaa (talk) 03:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:40, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. All three articles. It's just the one problematic user, and he/she will be autoconfirmed in two days. Please try to engage them in discussionDiannaa (talk) 03:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:40, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Diannaa (talk) 03:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant addition of unsourced information by IPs. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 00:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. 68.99.188.178 (talk · contribs) blocked by Daniel Case (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) Diannaa (talk) 03:43, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent unsupported changes applied by IP editor. It's a high profile page, but has not had excessive problems, but semi-protection may be suitable here. Length at whatever is appropriate? Alaney2k (talk) 23:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined There's no vandalism per se, and this is the kind of page that tends to attract new editors. Please re-report if the situation changes. Diannaa (talk) 03:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Mr.choppers (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism.  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked.: I've blocked 174.141.208.0/24 for 48 hours. Hopefully this will help. If it resumes, let me know or repost here and we can take another shot at it. Mike V • Talk 03:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I can already feel the difference. The vandal in question (see User:Altimgamr) has been pretty prolific over the last few months, so I don't know how much of a permanent improvement it will be. Cheers,  Mr.choppers | ✎  03:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Indefinite semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked. Abce2 (talk) 17:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Diannaa (talk) 03:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Wikiuser13 (talk | contribs) 17:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I am not seeing any vandalism. Diannaa (talk) 03:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Dubious unsourced controversial changes. STATic message me! 04:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Diannaa (talk) 02:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations. STATic message me! 02:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 05:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Shortly after previous 3 month protection expired, vandalism resumed at a fairly consistent rate. Thus I am requesting at least 6 months semi-protection (or pending changes if an admin considers that to be preferable). Jinkinson talk to me 21:58, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Mike V • Talk 05:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism – After prior PC time expired. George Ho (talk) 03:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only three edits in the last month. Diannaa (talk) 02:42, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection persistent vandalism. 117Avenue (talk) 02:29, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Diannaa (talk) 02:37, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP using different IPs to remove the same information repeatedly. Gloss • talk 17:10, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 03:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 14:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for one week to start. Please re-apply if the problem resumes when protection wears off. Diannaa (talk) 03:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Vandalism from IPs, will not engage in talk page discussion, edits progressively worse. Львівське (говорити) 00:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Please try to engage the IPs on the talk page. Diannaa (talk) 03:40, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It's a very active and fruitful talk page for actual engaged editors (sensitive topic). I'll try to talk to them...--Львівське (говорити) 03:42, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Requesting long-term protection (maybe 3 months?) from IPs and non autoconfirmed users. For months, these editors have been changing the series end date in the infobox, IP hopping to do so, etc. There seems to be a content dispute, but since none of the IPs/new accounts have bothered to participate in the existing talk page discussion, they are forcing a POV without having to endure the "D" aspect of WP:BRD. Thanks. . Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:41, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 03:32, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – It was temporary semi-protected a week ago. Using redirect some ip users try to delete this template without discussion again. But it was keep here: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 June 17#Template:Olympic sports. NickSt (talk) 09:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 03:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Anshul3Bansal (talk) 09:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 03:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary pending changes: Persistent breach of BLP policy by both registered and IP users. Evidence of some of this on talk page. Suggest this problem will only diminish some time after the end of UK political storm on the issue. Harfarhs (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 03:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Debates over controversy section. --Mdann52talk to me! 08:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Please clean up the article and try to engage the IPs on the talk page. Diannaa (talk) 03:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create Protection: Repeatedly editing figures in a section and manipulating words and facts without any proper reference and the real facts,reference are being removed without any reason. janmejai (talk)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 03:07, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Long-term IP-hopping vandal. Posting request on behalf of User:Vitaly1511 (original request on my talk page here). Sunrise (talk) 07:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 03:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Starvinsky (talk) 05:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of X, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The page has never been protected before, so we will start small. Please re-report if/when the problem resumes.Diannaa (talk) 02:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism after protection removed also related to bill keller page. Jguard18 Critique Me 04:17, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 02:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Vandalism after protection removed. Jguard18 Critique Me 04:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 02:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Vandalism/BLP policy violations from multiple IPs coming up again immediately after previous protection expired. Mz7 (talk) 03:40, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 02:44, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. --Jakob (talk) 01:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 02:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Article is frequent target of sock operator Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/FanforClarl/Archive See also User:Unorginal. Most of the 50 recent edits in the page history are either from socks, or are attempts to fix the damage. This article could benefit from long-term protection. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:14, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. One month to start; please re-report if the problem resumes when the protection wears off. Diannaa (talk) 02:32, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Chronic vandalism, possibly by same individual(s), over sustained period of time revisiting page. Thank you. — Cirt (talk) 00:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Please re-report if/when the activity resumes Diannaa (talk) 02:29, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism over the past month. PM800 (talk) 23:49, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Diannaa (talk) 02:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant editing against established consensuses by unregistered editors. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:57, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Miniapolis 23:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection. Vjmlhds 21:43, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

28 February 2014

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Adabow (talk) 20:09, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes: Persistent addition of promotional content. SMS Talk 17:49, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending-changes protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – persistent readdition of unreferenced and possibly defamatory content to BLP from various IP addresses. Ruby Murray 13:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:38, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bishonen | talk 21:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Immediately after the previous SP expired, the same old IP vandal is deliberately inserting factually inaccurate information, using various IPs. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:25, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:35, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – This page is subjected to continuous irresponsible editing with hoax and vandalism, regarding her conduct as principle and her personal life apparently being done for fun. I therefore request Indefinite semi protection level for this page to avoid new users and proxies form changing the content. Thanks OWAIS NAEEM ow@!s (talk) 05:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC) . ow@!s (talk) 05:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:32, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing and vandalism from IP's. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 04:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection. Persistent vandalism by autoconfirmed users Jim1138 (talk) 04:37, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Full protection for vandalism is used very sparingly and requires a significant amount of vandalism. I don't feel that criteria is met here. In addition, to be auto-confirmed a user must have 10 edits and the account must be at least 4 days old. None of the involved accounts have met this threshold. The semi-protection put in place by Connormah should help resolve this issue. Mike V • Talk 06:25, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Seems as if sockpuppets are insistent on adding POV claims Yee is "racist" because he supports some kind of support for under represented minorities. Added without reliable sourcing and violated BLP. Dave Dial (talk) 03:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template protection: Highly visible template. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:54, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Reduced from full protection to template editor protection since I assume that's what you are requesting. EdJohnston (talk) 21:10, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Link spamming, dubious unsourced additions and vandalism by anon IP editors. STATic message me! 02:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP users keep on adding vandalism. Probably multiple people too. –HTD 02:03, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Howard the Duck: We don't usually semi-protect pages indefinitely that haven't been protected before. Also, it looks more like WP:CRYSTAL violations than vandalism to me, at least mostly. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:36, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – User:Dagclown and his socks are messing up the page. buffbills7701 01:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant vandalism throughout the month. ZappaOMati 01:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:24, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – currently an edit war by a hopping IP is being done. they are all registered to London in the UK or the close vicinity. I show at least four today. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 23:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I've also applied indefinite PC1. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:20, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – ip user continues to revert edits of improvement on page without edit summary or against warnings on talk page. LADY LOTUS • TALK 21:41, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There is a lot of strange things going on in this article; it's probably related to some postings on twitter and may be some kind of publicity stunt/performance art or whatever. See also talk page. Iselilja (talk) 23:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 02:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: User Request . [[User:A915|A915]] (talk) 19:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, no need. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:30, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent levels of IP vandalism.

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I could only find one instance of vandalism in the last two weeks. Diannaa (talk) 20:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 23:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes requested, permanently; repeated breaches of WP:BLP apparently the subject of complaint by the subject and also definitely (per that link) not understood or appropriately acted upon by helpdesk respondents. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. And Pending-changes protected indefinitely. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – There have been IPs from Amazon edited the article/talk. They seem to be the same person, possibly a sock of this user. Please see my talk page. They are misused warnings as I've used the article talk page.[43] and [44]. But it is impossible to talk to the user because of the IPs are always changing. It's not an ordinary vandalism/sockpuppetry, but please semi-protect the article and talk page. Oda Mari (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There's only been one IP edit in the last two weeks. Talk pages are not protected except in cases of extreme disruption. Diannaa (talk) 20:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – this article is biased. Mufaddalqn (talk) 12:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Diannaa (talk) 19:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Disney%27s_Greatest_Hits&diff=596407962&oldid=596328654
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection/Archive/2014/02&oldid=1194736496"