Semi-protection: Repeated disruptive editing from multiple related anonymous IPs, in the form of added topics that consist entirely of short jiberish and/or emoji characters:
[16][17][18][19][20]. This has occured repeatedly over the course of the past month. —
Jamie Eilat (
talk)
21:11, 30 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Sporadic and especially recently disruption of the pages content. User "TrueHistory" blatantly overrides the consensus of different editors (including me and KansasBear), and disrupt the page in their own POV.
Noorullah (
talk)
19:13, 30 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Template editors should be allowed to edit any Wikipedia pages except for ones which can only be edited by interface administrator.
1.47.199.226 (
talk)
04:31, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Ideally this would be resolved in discussion on the article talkpage, but it seems no one has done so. Recommend that as a next step while this protection is in place. --
Euryalus (
talk)
14:08, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – It's on purpose. The semi-protection is temporary, while pending changes is permanent and will kick in when the semi expires.
Favonian (
talk)
08:33, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Various IP editors keep on repeatedly adding unencyclopedic stories to the article. This has been going on for several months now, but lately it's happening at an enough rate where semi-protection could be used... —
AP 499D25(talk)12:19, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Lots of recent IP vandalism, which appears to be a continuation from earlier vandalism by newer users who were warned regarding their edits. A shortish semi-protection would go a long way.
Trigaranus (
talk)
12:38, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of 1 day, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Latest LTA accounts blocked (again) with a short semi-protection as they'll likely get bored of this page and move on to others. Pleas repost if this resumes when the semi expires and it can be applied for longer.
Euryalus (
talk)
14:17, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: This very long page contains many unsupported statements, incorrect statements. and potentially libellous comments. It needs to be unprotected to permit corrections to be made. Thanks.
81.64.175.75 (
talk)
12:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: The protection is no longer necessary because in this page many things which is written by wrong people to decrease the real history and we have a source to update this page but due to protection we can't edit ....... .
Nitishjariya1 (
talk)
13:29, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – IPs and new accounts again repeatedly making unsourced changes to nationality after previous protection expired.
Mellk (
talk)
17:52, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Aside from the most recent pending change
which got rejected, other changes, esp. by anonymous users, don't seem to be disruptive or any form of vandalism. Also, the protector of the page lost its administrative privileges due to prolonged inactivity on WP.
197.14.66.123 (
talk)
05:51, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – You are obviously referring to the Persian article,
fa:ترکیبیات, not the
Combinatorics article on this (English language) Wikipedia. The administrators on this Wikipedia hold no authority on the Persian one.
Favonian (
talk)
19:40, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Hello, looks like you've reached the wrong spot. This is not persian, this is English. To report such, go to Farsi wikipedia relevant page.
ToadetteEdit (
talk)
19:44, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Continued disruptive editing/vandalism by new users and IP users. I think semi-protection would be useful until the attention dies down.
Spagooder (
talk)
07:26, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
He was doing that because an IP user changed some wording on June 30, and a new user and IP user (possibly same person) did some disruptive editing on the 24th and 25th. I get where you're going though, quite a bit was before I added the historical accuracy section to satisfy those types of contributors.
Spagooder (
talk)
19:35, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. That article has very little activity and I cannot understand why you are requesting page protection.
Daniel Quinlan (
talk)
03:51, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Page has been the constant target of vandalism, and needs protection.
User:Lalalaland555 is causing havoc and vandalism on the
Apollodorus of Damascus page with his or her disruptive edits. Encyclopedia Britannica, which is a credible source clearly labels, and describes Apollodorus of Damascus as a Greek engineer, and yet this user and others like him/her are unable to accept that.
Actually, the page has been the constant target of vandalism. Lalalaland555 is a POV pusher that's been openly hostile towards other users with a differing view. This is evident from his comments during his edits where this user refers to others as "hateful nationalists," and refers to honest edits as 'vandalism,' when this user himself/herself is the one that's causing vandalism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Apollodorus_of_Damascus&diff=1162998228&oldid=1162996640
Unprotection: No reason for this to be protected. The protection on this page was the result of the protection from
Titanic (1997 film) being transferred to this title when the article was moved here ... and the article was here for less than a day ... after an editor moved the article to this page without discussion.
Steel1943 (
talk)
23:15, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Repeated vandalism to insert porn in the infobox by various IPs. Suggest protection ASAP. This article is linked from the front page.
DFlhb (
talk)
11:50, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: The protection is no longer necessary because in this page some people made wrong edits and I know many things about this community and had source , many people of this community is not happy with this because it's this page didn't show the real history I request you please unprotect this page so I can make many changes which is required ....... .
Nitishjariya1 (
talk)
03:30, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
this community lives in India , and the edits which done by last few person which from other country who didn't know the real history made many changes in this , I don't want to unprotect but let me authorise to make nice changes it help to look real this page real , right now this page shown wrong history about this community I'll provided you a very loyal sources
Nitishjariya1 (
talk)
06:43, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Yes I'm not able to provide source in your comfortable language but in this article you can clearly see they said lodh lodhi are not rajput but they are rajput and Rajput is a title which given to the warriors
Source lodhi RajputNitishjariya1 (
talk)
07:35, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Article has been vandalized 8 times in last 33 days, all by IPs. Looking at the two months prior there's a lot of disruption and reverts. Page was previously protected in may which halted the disruption but that expired after 1 month. Thanks,L3X1◊distænt write◊16:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm sorely tempted to call
WP:IAR on this one and leave the protection in place. Twice now, on March 23 and June 24, IPs and accounts (at least one of them just-in-time-extended-confirmed) have been ready to pounce as soon as the protection expired, creating an awful mess that was selectively deleted from the edit history. However, as the OP has failed to do so, I notify
AmandaNP and
Courcelles, both of whom have protected the article.
Favonian (
talk)
16:09, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Good lord, even with COVID I don’t stop getting pinged. ;). But, yes, you’re right, @
Favonian. This was not an error, and it is
logged, so overturning this would be an AE matter.
Courcelles (
talk)
16:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Persistent
disruptive editing on the article; multiple users adding unsourced claims about the show "ending". Source that has been used is
not reliable. I suggest this page be protected until one full year has passed.
BrickMaster02 (
talk)
19:18, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I can tell that this is sock, since the ip address, originating from Turkey, had reverted your edits to that of the blocked user, which has also been reported as another sock.
ToadetteEdit (
talk)
06:18, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – An IP editor keeps repeatedly editing the article against the Manual of Style, in particular MOS:THEBAND, despite many warnings on their talk pages. The IPv6 addresses vary too much that a single rangeblock covering all of them would not be possible without too much collateral. —
AP 499D25(talk)07:37, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of
dispute resolution. Most of the editors involved are EC anyway, so nothing short of full-protection would stop it. Is that what you think the article needs?
Daniel Case (
talk)
21:48, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: BLP Policy Violations. IP's birth place related BLP vios continuing shortly after last protection expired.
TylerBurden (
talk)
23:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined IP editor said in last edit summary they're backing off for now because they don't want to get blocked for edit warring (see, this actually works!)
Daniel Case (
talk)
01:33, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Following the acceptance to reset pending protection for
mac OS X Snow Leopard due to the protector's inactivity on WP, I decided to bring other pages/articles/templates here, looking forward for a further review from other active users.
Cougar(
|
talk |
history |
links |
watch |
logs) (The user semi-protected the page while it is still pending protected up until now. Seriously, which type of protection should be removed?!!)
Declined. I'm certainly not going to unprotect all these pages just because they were protected by an admin who later became inactive. If you'd like to explain why any specific protections are no longer necessary, that'd be fine, but at a glance the grand majority of them are still warranted.
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
04:04, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Jéské Couriano I strongly supprt your suggestion! Different administrators could take their time, discuss about those protected articles in depth and determine whether or not any of those articles still require protection. Up till now, I am not done editing yet.
197.2.174.118 (
talk)
07:56, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: We need semi-protection. IPs going back & forth, over whether Domi has signed with the Toronto Maple Leafs.
GoodDay (
talk)
01:53, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Originally protected (or pending changes) whilst subject still living. Now subject is no longer such, and the consensus recently favored inclusion of material that led to pending changes. Protection might no longer be necessary for now.
George Ho (
talk)
06:05, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of
dispute resolution. Already semi-protected until December and it's not clear that EC protection would help as most of the editors involved are EC. --
Scott Burley (
talk)
08:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: For 20 years, Dr. Lenz's Wikipedia page has been vandalized by religious bigots who shamelessly fabricate lies and distort his life. Every time Dr. Lenz's page is cleaned and restored to factual information, inevitably it is destroyed by vandals. This happened again over the past two weeks. Whatever ridiculous material is added in order to defame Dr. Lenz, the vast majority of his students are united in their love and appreciation for everything he did for them, myself included. Wikipedia should not tolerate such dishonest, terrible vandalism and protect Dr. Lenz's page. Thank you. Respectfully, Lawrence Borok, author of "Rama Speaks: The Teachings of Rama-Dr. Frederick Lenz"
208.85.32.186 (
talk)
04:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Daily vandalism from unregistered users. Protection could be used on pretty much every Astros season page for the last 5 years honestly, they all get the same daily vandalism from the same unregistered person.
Korijenkins (
talk)
11:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Frequent vandalism, including a recent WP:BLP violation, apparently as revenge for editors on other pages labeling conservatives as "far-right"
White 720 (
talk)
14:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Persistent
vandalism on the article; IP users adding red links, changing episode air dates around, and replacing URLs with invalid links. Has been happening for quite some time now.
BrickMaster02 (
talk)
18:36, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Because IP users and new editors are making unsourced and wrong changes like crazy. The page is seeing massive editing because of being involved in current event
Shaan Sengupta (
talk)
21:25, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. It's true the article is being edited often and rapidly, but almost none of it involves IPs, so semi-protection would not be very effective. People need to go to the talk page. I suggest you start some discussions there about the material that is being disputed. And be sure to ping the people who are involved in the disputes/discussions.
MelanieN (
talk)
22:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Repeated vandalism regarding the gender identity of Lia Thomas. The article is very unlikely to need many future edits anyway, as it primarily details the results of an event which will not change. - callumpenguin (
talk)19:40, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semiprotection. Griffin is a prominent conspiracy theorist whose article has been under pending changes protection since January 2019 for exactly what you'd expect. Pending changes protection was built to prevent bad edits from new/anon users while allowing good edits from the same but it's no longer a good fit here since those editors never make good edits. (The only exception I could find in the last several months? An IP editor, two days ago, whose fine work was a revert of another IP editor's insertion of a lie.) Semiprotection would just automatically do what PC1 patrollers already do by hand several times a week. CityOfSilver22:30, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite full protection: This article has been semi-protected since March 2014, but the article is a train wreck. It is based on official census data with 2011 being the most recent census and the census is the only reliable source. However, the 2011 data has been relentlessly modified using unsourced and poorly-sourced present-day population estimates and at least 44 urban areas have been added by almost as many users despite not being listed as cities in the 2011 census. The edits include extended-confirmed accounts. I'm currently editing the article and will be working on clean up for a long period of time, but even after I am done, I believe this article will need to be remain fully protected based on the article history. (I am
WP:INVOLVED so I cannot do this myself.)
Daniel Quinlan (
talk)
23:57, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Extended confirmed protected I’m not unsympathetic to the full protection idea, but, two points, first, limiting it to EC accounts should limit the pool to a small enough number warning and blocking anyone left for addition of unsourced content should be possible. Second, using full protection to leave the article to only admin editors is a very drastic measure, and I’m not sure even admins can make edits on their own initiative per a strict reading of policy on fully protected articles. So, let’s see if this helps.
Courcelles (
talk)
00:39, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Two IPs have performed random blankings on this article — and this is not the first time this article has had such blankings by IPs in recent months. WCQuidditch☎✎01:13, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent Disruptive Editing. Chronic disruption related to different definitions in English and Scandinavian languages.
TylerBurden (
talk)
01:24, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Full protection from moves: Please fully protect this article from moves because of move warring; it'll encourage discussion through RMs.
Nythar (
💬-🍀)
03:23, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Not done, given that
severe vandalism or abuse needs to occur for protection of user talk pages and twice in three days is insufficient to reach that bar; full protection is not necessary at all when only non-autoconfirmed users are editing it; the last edit was a day ago; indefinite would be overkill.
Sdrqaz (
talk)
08:13, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I just realized an embarrassing typo. It must be PDH Cytopathy. Could anyone with the right to do so please correct it. SORRY and thank you!
BenjaminFeldman (
talk)
20:59, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Protected 7 years ago, may be time to see if the socking is gone. There wasn't even that much disruption pre-protection to begin with anyway, unless I am missing something.
47.227.95.73 (
talk)
15:14, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I fear that section mentioning the LTA's "favorites" may be outdated. The paragraph hasn't been altered once since the page's creation. Plus, most of the articles listed in that section aren't protected, and Aarhus is the only one protected because of the LTA.
47.227.95.73 (
talk)
16:45, 3 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. Good reason for current situation has been provided.
Johnuniq (
talk)
09:17, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
No it hasn't. For the backstory on Favonian and Johnuniq see my contribution record. Now, who's going to be first to file a MfD for the fictitious "LTA" attack page @
KK-Kenna:?
212.159.12.93 (
talk)
10:48, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Requesting Pending Changes Protection - there have been two edits from an IP address that were quite strange and could probably be considered as minor vandalism (one involved deleting a word and adding an unnecessary paragraph without any good reason and another replaced the word "Following" with "love day", which does not make any sense in that section's context whatsoever). Considering this article is about a notable upcoming service and will likely be accessed by many people in the leadup to and following the service's launch, in my opinion it is a good idea to upgrade protection to Pending Changes protection so that unregistered/new users don't make any disruptive edits to the article.
Jh15s (
talk)
11:59, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. It's just one disruptive edit by an IP editor. Also there is way too much activity for PC. I imagine semi-protection will be necessary very soon due to this being in the news, but we don't protect pages proactively. --
Scott Burley (
talk)
13:26, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: High level vandalism and edit warring by ips and newly registered accounts, removal of large scale [WP:RS]] contents and addition of dubious contents, please preserve the current version at the time of this request. Check history to view series of edit warring and vandalism.
Dilbaggg (
talk)
14:20, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Asking for page protection due to continuous vandalous attempts by IP user. The page has already been protected in the past for the same reason.
Sricsi (
talk)
18:10, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Recent disruptive editing; a number of autoconfirmed editors have attempted to remove reliably sourced content with no attempt at discussion, in conflict with consensus and
WP:DUE, and solely because of one source's updated reporting on the publication. PlanetJuice (
talk •
contribs)
18:48, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason:Temporary semi-protection: An anonymous editor using multiple IPs to edit-war on the page, insisting on inserting unsourced claim, and at times, be very abusive about doing so.
Mr Fink (
talk)
18:58, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Edit warring based on budget and critical review claims. Two particular users seem to be creating a ruckus and indulging in personal bias over the article, despite multiple sources citing the opposite.
aggarwala2727 (
talk)
19:37, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Extended confirmed protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. That will impact some but not all of the reverted editors.
aggarwala2727: During the EC protection you should engage the problem editors on the talk page and try to work out your differences. I see that one of them has already posted there. IMPORTANT: When the EC protection expires a week from now, be sure to contact me, or any administrator, to restore the semi-protection.
MelanieN (
talk)
22:14, 4 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason:Temporary semi-protection: Page is being attacked by a series of IPs being used by banned user Jinnifer to troll and harass other users into vandalizing the page as per her whims.
Mr Fink (
talk)
00:31, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Article is subject of persistent disruptive editing, removal of sourced prose, replaced by unsourced, mostly same nationalistic POV dragging on for years, including possible socking (ip/acount).
౪ Santa ౪99°04:13, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Protect the page until 26th of July. Also remove the teams in Format and Knockout section after the Full Protection applies.
♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯09:08, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Unregistered users continuously changing category "Military wings of fascist parties" to "Military wings of political parties". The Croatian Defense Forces were the military wing of the Croatian Party of Rights, a neo-fascist party.
Docktuh (
talk)
10:47, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection:BLP policy violations – Months of edit warring by two editors who are making no attempt to engage with each other. Also edits by SPAs with unsourced negative opinions.
Escape Orbit(Talk)11:18, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Persistent addition of unsourced content from partially blocked IP hopper, which is turning into open edit-warring.
Lone-078 (
talk)
15:50, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Leave the PP in place until the July 14th scheduled publication of the WHO report. A novice editor with no talk page consensus is continuing
WP:DE.
Zefr (
talk)
16:42, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Persistent disruptive editing by IP users due to the recent release of a film. Temporary semi-protection for a week or so should suffice
Hemiauchenia (
talk)
18:00, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: many good faith but problematic edits causing a large number of edit conflicts and also adding unsourced/poorly sourced content into the article.
Zippybonzo |
Talk (he|him)
19:23, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Unsourced, unexplained contributions that have to be reverted are not helpful.
Johnuniq (
talk)
07:23, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary pending changes: Persistent
vandalism – Page has been subject to frequent disruptive edits from unregistered users following recent news related to the subject. Temporary pending changes or semi-protection (perhaps for a period of 2 weeks?) would be beneficial. Vanilla Wizard 💙22:14, 5 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Persistent Vandalism. Page subject to constant removal of criminal history by unregistered user from outside of Australia
Blumph (
talk)
00:02, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)02:38, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Daniel Case, do I need to submit a separate request for each of the other 14 seasons in order to get the same level of protection added? I am happy to do so if that makes it easier for you.
Bgsu98(Talk)02:58, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:04, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:04, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:05, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:05, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:05, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:06, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:08, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:08, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:09, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:09, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting semiprotection of all 14 seasons due to disruptive edits from IP and fly-by-night editors, mass reverting all of the pages which are being edited to bring them into compliance with the MOS.
User:C.Fred dealt with this user yesterday and today.
Bgsu98(Talk)03:10, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Looking at the logs, not the first time the Dancing on Ice series articles have been semi-protected. —C.Fred (
talk)
03:11, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: It's been over a decade since this was create protected (apparently to stop an IP recreating the same copyvio version. I think that's long enough. The cartoon is in my opinion independently notable (being the first theatrical Looney Tunes short since 1969 and originally being released as a self-contained work), but even if it doesn't get its own article, it was included the compilation film Daffy Duck's Quackbusters the following year, which might be an appropriate redirect target. Either way, The protection is wholly unneeded after over a decade. It's actively impeding coverage of a notable subject at this point.
oknazevad (
talk)
03:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: This article has been protected since 2007, I'd like to get in and finish/publish the page. I already have a few articles under my belt so I'm very eager to get this one done! It seems like the page was originally locked because of some bad edits, but that was over 10 years ago. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Cmr0berts (
talk)
04:26, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Persistent
vandalism – We're a few cycles into the protect>unprotect>IP-vandalim now. The subject of this article seems likely to continue to be a BLP-policy-violation-magnet indefinitely.
CT55555(
talk)
11:26, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: BLP Policy Violations. BLP violation by non-autoconfirmed editor already an hour after protection expired, as it covers one of the most high-profile football players in the world and has been protected numerous times before, it would be best if the article recieves indefinite protection.
TylerBurden (
talk)
12:18, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Unsourced content being repeatedly added, should resolve itself on 9 July, when the positions of the 2 qualifiers are decided.
Joseph2302 (
talk)
13:13, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Unsourced content being repeatedly added, should resolve itself on 9 July, when the positions of the 2 qualifiers are decided.
Joseph2302 (
talk)
13:16, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Creation protected I have made it EC because the user who recreated is autoconfirmed (I am frankly wondering if maybe the better move would be to indefinitely block that user from the article so they can't recreate? Might that work?
Daniel Case (
talk)
19:47, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Move protection: Page title dispute/move warring – See page history, also suggested on talk page during latest move discussion.
ASUKITE14:33, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Multiple inaccuracies have been repeatedly added to the article. Corrections have been undone and inaccuracies restored.
72.95.19.35 (
talk)
01:37, 7 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined. The protection was made in response to a very long history of disruption, and that disruption will almost certainly start up again if the protection is lifted.
Extraordinary Writ (
talk)
03:11, 7 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Persistent level of vandalism, unconstructive edits with adding of unreferenced content and mass change of long staning content without any explanation by Ip user/s.
Srafciger88 (
talk)
20:13, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: this page need high level protection because
Dhirendra Singh bundela adding unsourced and fake information to Ahirwar, Ahirwar Chamar is a Dalit caste but Dhirendra Singh bundela adding Suryavanshi Kshatriya to Ahirwar Chamar without any sources.
AUDENMAYAS (
talk)
21:41, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Many unregistered IP-users tthat add the death of the article subject without any reliable sources to back it up with.
DrKilleMoff (
talk)
22:35, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Page is being targeted because subject is advocate of pronatalism, embryo screening, and eugenics.. Nominator is heavily muslim with the articles created and so is one of the voters.. The other guy David is working the page.. they are also targeting anyone who edits the page for a ban.. t
MasterCanner9 (
talk)
23:53, 6 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined@
MasterCanner9: Protection would require evidence of
vandalism. Note that comments such as "Nominator is heavily muslim" are very inappropriate at Wikipedia and would lead to a block if repeated. Please focus on article content.
Johnuniq (
talk)
08:06, 7 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: The protection is no longer necessary because Wikipedia is an information encyclopedia. It should be free for anyone to edit. It is not right to protect an article just because a few people can't handle themselves. Besides, Wikipedia doesn't have any problems with any of the other nearly 100,000 articles, but this one is particularly locked and I don't understand why.
Salamanderman476 (
talk)
06:16, 7 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Requesting indefinite autoconfirmed protection, as already suggested on that talk page in
April 2022. As seen in the edit history, the only edits to the talk page, for more than a year now, have been endless vandalism, which resumed as soon as an earlier, temporary spell of protection expired.
-sche (
talk)
09:23, 7 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – A dry article about the 20th century etymology of the term, and practically every edit it gets, going back years, is just a spammer trying to add a website link.
Belbury (
talk)
13:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of one month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. By all means, adjust the time if wanted but a significant period is useful to break the sock's habit.
Johnuniq (
talk)
10:10, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Not quite at that point where I'm comfortable with indef ... let's see how a longer protection period works.
Daniel Case (
talk)
01:59, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined@
MikeAllen: Sorry but it's hard to see why the edits are
vandalism. If the issue continues, put an explanation on article talk and then a new report here with a couple of diffs and a brief explanation.
Johnuniq (
talk)
10:17, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: I would like to request page protection for this particular page due to recurring incidents of vandalism. As evidence, you can refer to the following link:
[34], where the author's name, Vladimir Romanyuk, was changed to Vladimir Putin. This is just one example, but there have been other instances in the past where the page has been defaced.
K1ltu SE (
talk)
18:41, 7 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
K1ltu SE: The vandalism isn't enough to warrant protection. There needs to be persistent vandalism or disruptive editing for protection to be warranted; the SpaceEngine article hasn't been edited by anyone since June 26, and the last time it was vandalized was on June 21. Pages are usually protected if they are persistently vandalized, so I wouldn't worry about this article if I were you.
Nythar (
💬-🍀)
18:48, 7 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: An anon that uses different IP addresses keeps on adding a hoax list of supposedly "new hosts" for this program. The edit summary usually reads: "Kada Umaga Will Additionals More Hosts Again.". -
WayKurat (
talk)
00:03, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Repeated edit warring by unregistered user who modifies data to contradict cited sources and never provides edit summaries or discusses on talk page. This user has a history going back some time, but recently has escalated, and persisted despite warning.
Ttocserp00:51, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Now other unregistered users with similar but not identical IP addresses are doing the same thing: same modus operandi, no edit summary, no discussion, just revert without comment.
Ttocserp15:24, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. Two instances today that did not recur, and I see no reason why we should exclude non-autoconfirmed users from it.
Daniel Case (
talk)
02:24, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. You do realize that given that you are non-autoconfirmed, you are now unable to edit the article?
Daniel Case (
talk)
20:23, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
We have no way to verify who the IP is. Normal Wikipedia policy in this case, to protect the subject, would be to protect the article and/or block the IP (or user) until they verified their identity with the Volunteer Response Team. —C.Fred (
talk)
02:35, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: this page need high level protection because
Dhirendra Singh bundela adding unsourced and fake information to Ahirwar, Ahirwar Chamar is a Dalit caste but Dhirendra Singh bundela adding Suryavanshi Kshatriya to Ahirwar Chamar without any sources.
AUDENMAYAS (
talk)
03:02, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
User(s)
blocked. @
AUDENMAYAS: There should be an explanation at article talk giving a reason that the edits were inappropriate. The edit warring continued after a warning so the block was justified, but it takes two to edit war and you should try to engage the other user on article talk.
Johnuniq (
talk)
04:28, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Permanent semi-protection: This article needs to get semi-protected permanently. Apart from being a significant topic that makes it important to academically develop this article
Constructively and maintain quality standards, it has been a frequent target of
disruptive edits,
Sectarian POV pushing and potential
vandalism by anon IPs and sleeper accounts.
This phenomenon is likely due to ambiguities involved in the etymology of the term "Wahhabism" itself; in addition to high political sensitivities revolving around it. The article was semi-protected for a period of 6 months in 2022, only to experience waves of sporadic disruptions after its expiry, with one wave emerging recently.
Shadowwarrior8 (
talk)
04:27, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection:BLP policy violations – This page is a target of various IP and mobile phone users trying to add uncited (and I think incorrect) BLP policy violations. We are just a few days after the lack protection expired.
CT55555(
talk)
13:40, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined, you have warned the user, and they have not edited after the last warning. If they return for vandalism, pls let us know.--
Ymblanter (
talk)
17:51, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Repeated IP vandalism - page was previously under extended protection status, vandalism has persisted after protection was lifted.
Schwinnspeed (
talk)
16:42, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined I'm going to take the IP at their word on their talk page that they're done. Also, EC is far above the level of protection needed for IP vandalism.
Daniel Case (
talk)
20:39, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
IP may be a blocked user, Walter Görlitz, currently under indefinite ban for edit warring. IP pasted an edit warring notice dated 2019 onto my Talk page, with Görlitz signature.
G. Timothy Walton (
talk)
22:23, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Repeated edit to contradict cited sources and introduced false information for political reason. This is happening even more during the election period in Cambodia.
Ran1283mxvuth (
talk)
22:15, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Potential for COI edits. Anonymous editors with IP addresses in the same geographic region as the article's subject have provided numerous edits, providing very detailed information on the subject (e.g. voluminous detail on Katchanovski's blog posts, each carefully archived before citation) and responded to questions on the talk page about potential COI with wild charges of editor bias that have acted to "smear" and "censor" Dr Katchanovski. These edits make up a sizable fraction of the total material in the article.
Nangaf (
talk)
00:48, 9 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Requesting semi-protection for perhaps a month (I'm marginally
WP:INVOLVED). IP-hopping user keeps making the same unsourced edit over the last two weeks despite being warned. A block on the IP range looks like it might hit some other editors so protecting the page seems like a better option.
Daniel Quinlan (
talk)
06:06, 9 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection: Repeated unexplained deletion of sourced content and addition of a spammy link (I get a DNS error, but that may not be their intention) by IP editors. - Sumanuil. (talk to me)02:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Ongoing efforts by IPs and recently registered editors over the past couple of days painting the subject as little more than a charlatan. At least one of their allegations is demonstrably wrong, as I've indicated on the article's Talk page. –
Skywatcher68 (
talk)
04:31, 9 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Extended confirmed protection: Users are publishing nonsensical edits and worsening the prose. Source comments are not working. Semi-protection has been applied before but is no longer present. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him)16:10, 9 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Heavy IP vandalism / addition of unsourced content. The page has been protected previously multiple times.
Pelmeen10 (
talk)
16:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Continuous restoration of content whose sources are either dead, or redirects to main pages. The only archived source is entirely broken, while the latest cars were added to Shanghai Maple. Same IP as the request above. ToadetteEdit(
chat)/ (
logs) 17:18, 9 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Show has taken a time leap, new cast members are added as main leads, fans of previous leads vandalising and removing new leads name every now and then, please provide a temperory semi-protection of 15 days
Imsaneikigai (
talk)
09:15, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – AFD consensus to redirect, IP users trying to revert back to article. Please protect for e.g. a year, by which time an article will likely be acceptable.
Joseph2302 (
talk)
12:20, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – More IP disruption after protection wasn't enforced yesterday
[43]. The second article could also be protected, see history of disruption, IP and new accounts
[44]. Requesting protection per
WP:GS/AA.
KhndzorUtogh (
talk)
13:37, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Persistent disruptive editing - the article includes a list of potential candidates and their ages (which are calculated using {{age}}). An IP keeps replacing the template with hard numbers, which means the ages will be wrong unless constantly updated. Cheers,
Number5717:30, 7 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Daniel Case: There have been six instances in the last couple of weeks, and this has been going on since January. At what point does it become enough to justify it?
Number5711:23, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Usually that tells us the editors are handling it well enough. I can put a CTOPS notice on the talk page (EE) if you'd like, and revisit this under that provision if it continues.
Daniel Case (
talk)
18:48, 8 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Pending-changes protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected., we had one more instance today, and I believe pending changes protection would be appropriate for this editing pattern.--
Ymblanter (
talk)
18:10, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Constant vandalism from IPs and SPAs. Page very visited due to the current political situation, so please ask for a prompt response.
David C. S. (
talk)
15:48, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. I'm seeing some contentious edit summaries, yes, and that might suggest action needed against the editor if it continues. But I do not see a lot of chronic edit warring. Not yet.
Daniel Case (
talk)
17:54, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I would note, however, that for a "regular" vandal I see no evidence that he did this going back over a year.
Daniel Case (
talk)
17:58, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I do not consider this a CTOPS action but I have put a notice on the talk page in case this continues after the protection expires.
Daniel Case (
talk)
18:03, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Please change Professor Thomas Whalen of Boston University commented that the South Boston 8th district is traditionally conservative and Lynch is native to the area and has strong ties to labor unions, but thought recent years of changing dynamics could help Wu to Professor Thomas Whalen of Boston University said that, while the labor union-connected Lynch was native to South Boston's traditionally conservative 8th district, recent years of changing demographics could help Wu for reasons of flow and precision. (source:
[45], which is already cited in the article after the following sentence). —
Red-tailed hawk(nest)05:17, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Please change In 2020, she co-founded Rebellion PAC, a political action committee with a focus on running advertisements in support of progressive electoral candidates, alongside Cenk Uygur. to In 2020, she and Cenk Uygur co-founded Rebellion PAC, a political action committee with a focus on running advertisements in opposition to Donald Trump and in support of progressive get-out-the-vote efforts for flow and better source-text agreement. (Source:
[46], which is already cited in the article in that sentence). —
Red-tailed hawk(nest)05:21, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Please strike On July 22, 2019, she was interviewed by the Crooks and Liars contributor Howie Klein and the accompanying citation. This is something that clearly passes
WP:V, but it seems to only be cited to a primary source and it seems a bit odd weight-wise. —
Red-tailed hawk(nest)05:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Please change As a result of the harassment, Wu said that she was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) to Wu said that she was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of the harassment, keeping the existing citation. It seems better flow-wise and makes "as a result of the harassment" modify "was diagnosed with" rather than "said". —
Red-tailed hawk(nest)05:29, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Please strike The title of her retrospective piece for Marie Claire in October 2018 sums up her political philosophy: "I Ran for Congress. I Lost. I'm Persisting. Quitting Is Not an Option in the Trump Era." and the accompanying citation. This appears to be
WP:OR in the BLP, as the
source cited (i.e. the retrospective piece written by Wu) doesn't actually make reference to the title as if it were representative of her political philosophy. —
Red-tailed hawk(nest)05:33, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined Seems to have died down, and has already been listed at the edit-warring noticeboard; let's wait for the outcome.
Lectonar (
talk)
08:03, 11 July 2023 (UTC)reply
What are you talking about? I'm not a sockpuppet! What's wrong with my edit? And yes, I was waiting for the article to be unlocked to work at it, so what's the problem?
84.222.64.189 (
talk)
22:50, 10 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent Disruptive Editing. Due to persistent non-autoconfirmed edits including vandalism, constant changing of result without consensus despite the clear hidden note, and other forms of disruption I believe this article should simply be semi-protected to save pending changes reviewers time, as there is little to no constructive edits from non-autoconfirmed sources.
TylerBurden (
talk)
10:40, 11 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection: Persistent addition of
unsourced or poorly sourced content – While I think there probably have been programming changes at this station, actual reliable sources (as opposed to, for instance,
unofficial YouTube postings of station IDs we probably should not be linking to in any way) appear to be lacking at this time, despite repeated additions by various IPs. WCQuidditch☎✎01:16, 11 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. Besides, the discussion has been closed as "delete", which should reduce the motivation for further disruption.
Favonian (
talk)
12:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary pending changes protection: Persistent Vandalism. There is persistent and regular vandalism from IPs and sometimes new accounts. Chamaemelum (talk)
08:10, 11 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – There has been repeated disruptive editing from user Apophis82, trying to exclude intersex people from the lead definition in this article (which I added today as it seemed a glaring error in the summary), the article contains multiple references to intersex people experiencing this condition as do external sources. Having looked back in the edit history the edit warring user first made an amendment to change 'child' to 'male' erroneously a few weeks ago and are now protecting that edit. This condition is in the news as the verdict on
Caster Semenya's hearing in the ECHR was made today, she is intersex and experiences this condition, Apophis82 seems potentially to be editing this article to make the point that she is 'male'. I do not want to 'edit war' further.
Mountaincirquetalk11:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Extended confirmed protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Since the edit warring over the budget and sources continued during the last semi-protection, I am going to EC this time ... let's see how that works out.
Daniel Case (
talk)
22:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Looks like the sole vandalising IP has been blocked. I had initially misread and thought it was multiple IPs. Protection may not be necessary. –
Recoil16 (
talk)
01:23, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Allegations have been made against the actor and there are currently some edit wars going on. I believe it is better to put a temporary protection on the article.
Leo Mercury (
talk)
12:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
We have reported each other many times, and it was verbalized by an admin that we should leave each other but he still customarily checks my contributions, he reverts that even my user page, he is now replicating my sandboxes and aforetime he incriminated me of facsimileing his pages. I am having sources to integrate there but afore I integrate he rollbacks everything. There is an inordinate amount of content to provide source and I am having sources fot it to integrate there. You should give a time afore reverting.
✠ ZenDragoX✠(contact)13:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't check your contributions, those articles are in my watchlist and as far as I know anyone can see anyone's contributions. Also you're the one who made same name subpages as me and started adding same thing as me, so don't falsely accuse me.
Ajeeb Prani (
talk)
13:49, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of
dispute resolution. AN3 won't help then; the article needs more eyes, so I would think a
third opinion might be a way forward. Afaict, there also problems with the weighing of the sources.
Lectonar (
talk)
14:02, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of
dispute resolution. I don't think protecting this page is necessary at this point, but if the edit warring continues, we can reconsider. Also, one user has been blocked for 24 hours for 3RR violations and another user has been warned. If the edit warring continues, please report it to
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring.
Daniel Quinlan (
talk)
19:58, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary extended confirmed protection:BLP policy violations – news story with major factual error repeatedly reinserted. Story says user was wikibaned for COI, which is not true.
ResultingConstant (
talk)
16:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I dunno why it selected extended confirmed protection. But in any case, some kind of protection is needed. Edit warring continues with no discussion.
ResultingConstant (
talk)
16:27, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Full-protection: Edit War by established accounts. Requesting full protection and reversion back to pre-edit war revision while discussion of sources continues on talk.
I was just asked to do this as I've done the current semi. But since then have edited the article. Either full or semi, the protection needs to be renewed.
"
This is getting out of hand. They're now ignoring guidelines and re-writing the lead willy-nilly while discussion is ongoing. They've put the Wiccan definition on top (so the lead no longer matches the body), are using
dictionaries as sources (without proper formatting), and are deleting parts of the lead that they don't like. There have been several reverts today. I think the article should be restored to the last stable version and given greater protection or even locked until this issue is dealt with. It's protection is due to run out soon, and it will be getting a lot of traffic tomorrow as
Margaret Murray will be the featured article. –
Asarlaí(
talk)00:16, 12 July 2023 (UTC)"reply
Comment: I don't see an edit war, but I do see a lot of healthy, ongoing, multi-project discussion on the talk page as the result of requests left on several relevant project pages, centred around the previous controversial opening sentence in the lede that sets the whole tone of the article: Witchcraft traditionally means the use of magic or supernatural powers to harm others. and short description, Practice of magic, usually to cause harm.
On one hand we have established gatekeepers who insist on this unbalanced lede, and have now emphasised (in bold) words and phrases in citation quote parameters to emphasise their point that witchcraft is most commonly seen as "malignant" (after I advised against underscoring the words and phrases), as this verges on
WP:EDITORIAL or
WP:OR (and debatably
WP:OWN).
There have also been accusations that the Neopagan community have piled-in, but I don't see that; indeed, I saw the comment request at Skepticism.
And on the other hand we have those who see the article as exhibiting systemic bias (over the course of centuries in Christendom, and in more recent times).
Comment: Yes, we are both involved: Edit difference.. In checking which projects had been notified, since there was a misguided accusation that projects had not been notified, I left a comment at systemic bias to air my point of view that this was not systemic bias by this negligent editor but rather systemic bias in the article and in the scholarly sources most recently used (earlier revisions used different reliable sources and treated the subject much differently). I also left a comment on CorbieVreccan's page when I saw that Asarlaí had contacted him about protecting the page (as per their comment above), merely echoing CorbieVreccan's view that the place for talking about improvements to the article was the article talk page (not in an off-page huddle about how to deal with interlopers like me).
Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism who does not abide by the rules that were jointly agreed upon on the Talk page. Preferably block for IP users only until August 2, the day of the show broadcast.
Dominikcapuan (
talk)
21:10, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I am the IP this user is referring to and I would implore anyone reviewing this to read the article’s talk page (where no agreement or consensus was reached) and crucially the edit summaries which explain the situation.
One of the contestants on the upcoming season of Drag Race Philippines is called ØV CÜNT. In the official ‘Meet the Queens’ video released by World of Wonder, the name is shown on screen in a graphic as ØV CÜNT. In an Entertainment Weekly article about the contestants, they censored it to ØV C—-T.
The Wikipedia article incorrectly stated that the name would be censored in graphic renderings in the series, which we can’t possibly know until it airs, and isn’t clarified either way in the source (the EW article). The best indication we have is the Meet the Queens video from the production company which shows the name uncensored in a graphic rendering. I added the video as a reference but this editor has lied that it is unacceptable as a reference (despite another video from the production company being used as a reference for the premiere date).
We reached a compromise of inserting a note which pointed out the differences between the EW article and the official video, but this editor has been edit warring, despite me asking them not to on the article’s talk page and the user talk page. I believe they are imposing their personal preference on the article without using logic and reason.
2.24.250.74 (
talk)
21:21, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
In my part I can say that how the compromise is made and how it was to be respected, since some people don't want to get into their ears, is written in the appropriate talk on the page. --
Dominikcapuan (
talk)
21:37, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Not least because the source that the IP user insists on including is not even the source he is attesting to (since it is the video related to the cast announcment and not the MTQ, which is on a paid platform ergo... which cannot be used as a source as a matter of principle). --
Dominikcapuan (
talk)
21:42, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Filmssssssssssss, aren't episode writing and storyboarding credits usually straight from the opening or closing credits of the work itself? I'm seeing that this is done without a citation/footnote even in FA-quality TV articles. I spot checked the first episode credit they added, and the IP was right. Do you have a reason to suspect something like sneaky vandalism?
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
02:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
sockpuppetry – IP Address sockpuppetry. Hard to track editor down and discuss the edits because they keep changing their IP address every time they edit but it's clear it's the same person because the edits are the same. They keep adding information after I remove it that is non-notable and/or irrelevant information to article making it excessively long. Attempted to reach out to one of the IPs making the edits and there was no response and a few hours later they edited the page again from a different IP address just a few hours later.Rockchalk71721:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
And in the time since posting the request, the editor has added back content I've removed once again from another IP address.--Rockchalk71722:07, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Current protection level being flouted constantly by IP trolls who keep vandalising the page daily. Protection level needs increasing to constant semi-protection
RM-Taylor (
talk)
23:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: IP vandalism resumed immediately after page protection was lifted. I have no idea why this innocuous article is attracting this kind of attention, perhaps an investigation is needed. There are no obvious links between the IPs but it could be someone using proxies. This diff makes it stark:
[58]MaxBrowne2 (
talk)
00:55, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm unable to pull together a SPI case before I have to busy for a day or so, but will someone please look into potential sockpuppetry by IagoHughes at this article and file if they see what I see? One user block, one /64 block, and semi-protection might do the trick.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
04:43, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Fully protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. since the talk page discussion has been going on a while. If consensus is reached before then, it can of course be unprotected. I have also left a CTOPS notice on the talk page because it seems this content dispute goes to that issue.
Daniel Case (
talk)
18:23, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Genuine question: since
WP:FILMOGRAPHY is WikiProject advice with essay-level status, can the sourced addition of a pre-production film be considered disruptive editing? It's not that I oppose protection, I'm just trying to gauge current admin practice. Another note: at least one auto-confirmed user has recently added the film, so semi-protection would not fully prevent the editing in question.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
04:06, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Persistent removal of the artwork and other unconstructive edits from seemingly related IPs. Potential sockpuppetry going on as well (isn't really talking like a new user so it's either someone block evading or logged out). NØ06:03, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Question: okay, but is the image verifiable as the album cover? If so, please specify, because I wasn't able to immediately figure that out.
El_C06:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
That article does not link to that exact image, though. Where did it, specifically, come from? I mean, you are the uploader, so where did you find it?
El_C07:04, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Nothing here is obvious to me. Anyway, I can't access Twitter because I don't have an account, so I'll just leave this with someone else.
El_C08:20, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Vandalism restarted soon after unprotection, vandal was blocked once since page unprotection but circumvented block by changing IP (within the 79.106.203.xxx range). This vandal has also used the 185.200.251.xxx, 146.0.19.xxx, 185.200.248.xxx, 185.200.249, and 185.200.250.xxx ranges so a simple IP-blocking won't be enough. Tube·
of·
Light09:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: There is
a discussion about the lead, but involved users are re-writing the lead to fit their own views while discussion is ongoing. They are deleting content and putting their preferred meaning on top, even tho' that meaning is only covered in one small part of the article. The vast majority of the article is about the traditional and most common meaning. The article was stable for a long time, but there have been several reverts in the past two days, and the article will be now be getting a lot of traffic as
Margaret Murray is today's featured article. I believe the article should be restored to the last stable version (before 11 July) and given greater protection until the issue is dealt with. –
Asarlaí(
talk)11:49, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – A group of IP users and others have targeted a sourced sentence and deleted it.
Egeymi (
talk)
14:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. Been going on for years. Troll trolls, we do the
WP:RBI. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Favonian (
talk)
19:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Near daily vandalism since end of one-year protection in June. Log shows that page has spent far longer since its 2016 creation under protection than open for editing, relentless vandalism.
Unknown Temptation (
talk)
18:32, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Ever since the article was automatically unprotected in October 25th, 2022, there has been many cases of unregistered IP accounts or sockpuppet accounts adding either "fanon" information containing fake episodes/VHS openings, and adding mentions of foreign channels that don't even air the programme. Most articles for animated children's programming (eg: Paw Patrol, Bluey, Caillou) seem to be semi-protected for this reason.
Chazpelo (
talk)
19:45, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: A page which is indefinitely protected a decade ago by a deceased user. Also, other pages related to that sport are suffering little to no
WP:DEs or
WP:VANDALISM. Can this page lose its protection settings?
41.226.105.197 (
talk)
17:07, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: High levels of vandalism/unconstructive edits from IP and newly registered users. Talk page history is full of edit wars, adding unsourced material and reverting edits without justification. Is there a way to protect the article until election day against edits made by IP/Newly registered users?
TDKR Chicago 101 (
talk)
21:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
sockpuppetry – Rampant sockpuppetry and meatpuppetry from IP editors, who have descended on the talk page of a faith-based film en masse in order to push their POV on the various discussions.
Fred Zepelin (
talk)
00:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Ongoing slow edit warring by Megalogastor. Multiple editors have tried to address them on the talk page to get consensus for changes to longstanding content instead of reinserting disputed changes. I'm hoping protection will focus this somewhat new editor on discussing edits.
KoA (
talk)
01:41, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: The protection is no longer necessary because ....... .
Allbird85 (
talk)
06:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC) L'article n'est pas neutre et est haineux. Tout le monde à droit à son opinion sans se faire humilier ! Des millions de personne, de médecins et de spécialistes sont d'avis contraire aux vaccins. Il n'est pas seul et tout prouve en 2023 qu'il a toujours eu raison de ses dires.. Alors je me dois de changer cet article qui parle de lui neutralementreply
Reason: Persistent disruptive editing – Recently another singer with the same birth name, but different birth year, has died and different editors and IPs have confused Lee Tzsche for the soprano that passed away. Also, the addition of unrelated refs to the article's subject is still ongoing, despite the fact that other editors (included me) have pointed out the age difference between the two. Thanks,
Bloomingbyungchan (
talk)
09:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – There have been several cases of vandalism and additions of unsourced content over the past two days due to social media. Nothing has been reported by reliable sources, so some of the edits that have been reverted may be viewed as libellous.
Fats40boy11 (
talk)
10:08, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – I am again asking for protection on this page. I believe the person who was going to handle it may have went offline but the IP user is again disrupting the content of the page, and other editors have reverted them plenty of times, including on the
Bahmani Sultanate page. If someone else reviews this, may it also please be applied to said page as aforementioned? since disruption has also taken place there.
Noorullah (
talk)
13:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Tentative ratification dates keep being added to the table despite the fact that there is no official source for these dates. The official dates for parliamentary votes on the matter of Swedish accession to NATO haven't been announced. This was briefly mentioned on the talk page, but edits to add unsourced dates continue.
Discombobulates (
talk)
14:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined@
Discombobulates: The information is also being added by autoconfirmed users. I would recommend adding an inline comment to the table noting that the date should not be added at this point and explaining why (and add a similar comment anywhere else people are making similar edits).
Daniel Quinlan (
talk)
19:54, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Not done The article is already semi-protected and there doesn't seem to be enough disruptive activity to justify a higher level of protection.
Daniel Quinlan (
talk)
20:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I added a CTOPS notice, but although this is the sort of behavior that I usually log, in this case I'm just making it an ordinary administrative action since the article is so new. We'll see how it goes afterwards.
Daniel Case (
talk)
03:53, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Footballer involved in potential transfer deal and is having page edited by users of potential buying club despite the deal not being done.
ScouseSocialist (
talk)
21:33, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Much disruptive editing; India vs. Pakistan edit warring especially recently but has been going on for years.
Ram1751 (
talk)
22:30, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite full protection: Persistent
vandalism – Persistent Vandalism on the page by an IP user who overrides numerous editors reverting their changes while they POV push over origins. This was first done on the page of Ala-ud-Din Bahman Shah, which I am also setting up a RFPP for as well.
Noorullah (
talk)
23:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Noorullah21: I merged these two requests because they both relate to the same issue. You mean indefinte semi-protection (full protection would mean no one could edit apart from administrators). Very few pages are indefinitely protected and the disagreement at these articles is far too minor to warrant lengthy protection. I see that nearly all
103.120.71.93's edits have been reverted but I cannot see an explanation of why. Someone with no topic knowledge cannot judge whether the IP's edits are disruptive and they do not look like
WP:VAND. Can you add an explanation at
Talk:Bahmani Sultanate and ping me when done? If the IP is adding bad information, that needs to be explained to the IP. If they persist, a block could be considered.
Johnuniq (
talk)
05:29, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined There have been no edits to either article for most of a day, and for now I think we should let Johnuniq's intercession on the talk page play out (speaking of which, I've put CTOPS notices on both of them, because they do come under IPA and these edits are the kind that case is meant to address).
Daniel Case (
talk)
03:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protect for month or more: Regular trolling target and frivolous edit-request by pro-Trump anon, often without citing any reliable source at all. --
Sameboat - 同舟 (
talk ·
contri.)
04:26, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of
dispute resolution. Though unreferenced and unexplained, a quick check suggests the IPs are right about the subtitle they're adding. If so, either version is "correct", and some talk page discussion might help.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
13:34, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
(
edit conflict) You aren't actually removing the seemingly unreferenced statement about the show's conclusion, but rather the IP replacement of
Luv Is with
Luv Is: Love at First Read. You've warned one of the two IPs for misusing edit summaries, despite you using the exact same edit summary the following edit. Have you tried actually reaching out to them about the content? Declined.
DatGuyTalkContribs13:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Pending Changes Protection/Semi Protection/Extended Confirmed Protection: The campaign box of
[64] has been going through a cycle of revisions to increase the numerical inferiority of Bangladesh to make it look like they had a disadvantage in the conflict and change the result of the conflict ("Victory of Bangladesh" or "Bangladeshi Victory ")since atleast 2020 mostly by IPs registered in Bangladesh.The majority of them get reverted at some point.In June 2023 , I reverted another disruptive edit to the original version.A while later , User:
Evrenos0 edited the campaignbox in a disruptive manner in this edit:
[65].After reading his edit summary, I researched the topic and increased India's strength, however Evrenos0 proceeded to to once again edit the campaignbox without any explanation in these edits :
[66][67].I request extended confirmed protection or pending changes protection for this article since this has constantly been a source of disruptive nationalist edits by users from Bangladesh and India.Atleast 1 disruptive edit per week since 2 years
Smahwk (
talk)
13:01, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Fully protected for a period of 4 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected., placed under CT restrictions, and please remind me to indefinitely semi-protect it when it expires if I forget.
DatGuyTalkContribs14:08, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined - In the body, it says (and is sourced) that he won the 2021, 2022, and 2023 editions of the contest. That makes it three. Not sure why you keep reverting it.
DatGuyTalkContribs13:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: High level of IP vandalism, and new users are coming and changing content and removing countries from it. It is also controversial, please give it full protection (Extended Confirmed Editing only).It is like a page of a country as it is unification of India but new Ips and users are removing their contries from it.
✠ ZenDragoX✠(contact)14:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Vandalism by various new users, generally inserting woke in Niemanns' name. This looks to have been going on since 12th July.
Knitsey (
talk)
18:30, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm pretty thankful for the protection. The amount of disruption including sockpuppetry we had to deal with there before does in my opinion justify the action. I'll treat your message as an edit request for the talk page by copying it there and recommending this here to be closed without unprotection.
~ ToBeFree (
talk)
05:19, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Fayninja, probably because the page is extended-confirmed protected. You have made 423 edits so far and are close to gaining the ability to edit the page yourself. In the meantime, please
click here to request an edit if there's something specific to be changed.
Reason: Slow but clear edit war over whether she was born on the 5th or 6th of June. May need a cited source for a final date. I reckon her fans are going based off of when she posts on social media about her birthday, forgetting she's from Italy and it could theoretically be "tomorrow" over there compared to the American editors.
2601:601:A300:D880:0:0:0:132B (
talk)
19:30, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection: Persistent addition of
unsourced or poorly sourced content – A large chunk of the IP edits over the past two years or so, from many ranges but all seemingly from one person, are all unsourced and often not factually correct (even as they insist in every edit summary that their changes are "correct and true"). WCQuidditch☎✎22:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
If it's OK, can you advise me if I needed to add anything else to this request, for my future reference. It's the first time I've used Twinkle to make a request. Thank you,
Knitsey (
talk)
22:41, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: IP keeps adding a section on a Portuguese remake of the show using IMDb as a reference, despite requests to not do so.
Seasider53 (
talk)
23:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months (all), after which the page will be automatically unprotected. All except
Florida Georgia Line, which seemed to have been added to the list in error (I removed it from the list, since otherwise it'll confuse the bot and prevent it from archiving this request).
El_C09:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
อ่านก่อนตั่งชื่อ: Could you tell me how you even found the vandalism in that category? The user who vandalized the category was Sod1123, and you somehow managed to find their and one of their socks' (Sod11211) user talk pages, and you've left warnings at both talk pages for different reasons:
12. Both warnings were left weeks or months after the accounts vandalized articles and other pages. In addition, both accounts – including yours – edit the Thai Wikipedia. You've also
"reverted vandalism" at another sock's talk page, and this sock seems to have also accessed the Thai Wikipedia (judging by their accounts
here). A minute ago you edited the page of
yet another sock, whose username is also written in Thai. This is all very suspicious.
Nythar (
💬-🍀)
06:17, 16 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Persistent vandalism, incl. BLP policy violations, stretching years with various intensity. Vandalism is highly unlikely to subside in the foreseeable future, as mainstream Islam continues to refuse to accept the group's self-identification, which causes incessant attacks on related Wikipedia articles, including vandalism to this one. The article is additionally covered by ARBIPA discretionary sanctions, and protection would go a long way as a help in enforcement. —
kashmīrīTALK11:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Several IPs/new users are misunderstanding current news to assume that the FTC has approved the merger. There's more legalities to the FTC's issue and hence it can't be marked approved.
Masem (
t)
15:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined Only one for-cause deletion, and SALTing drafts is a good way to get people to start hopping around to less predictable titles. --
Tamzincetacean needed (she|they|xe)18:53, 16 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of
unsourced or poorly sourced content – It may be a good idea to reintroduce page protection to this article.
There are many people adding unsourced changes claiming that OceanGate is no more. According to the Washington State Department of Revenue, this is not the case.
IncompA (
talk)
20:09, 16 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Persistent disruptive edit from IP for removing box office bomb claim when many sources says it is the box office bomb.
LancedSoul (
talk)
21:58, 16 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent
vandalism – Many users have, in the past, and in the present (see user BeardedOverlord), have removed content from this article; mainly relating to the generally agreed upon scholary consensis that the Balli Kombëtar were a Fascist millitant group - usually to protect the integrity and history - of the country. It may seem a little exetreme, but when said users are asked to stop, they almost never do, only stopping when blocked from Wikipedia. (see history on page)
I'd be grateful to whomever protects this article. Wikipedia does not deserve those who reshape history for their own personal bias.
IncompA (
talk)
22:49, 16 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Pending changes: Persistent
vandalism – Repeated test edits or vandalism from changing IPs (all with edit summary "Kris Lund"). Pending-changes may be preferable due to some constructive IP edits (e.g.
1,
2).
Tol (
talk |
contribs) @
02:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Fully protected for a period of 2 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Logged as ARBEE enforcement. @
Khirurg: can you please ensure the editors involved have been notified of the contentious topics procedure in this topic area? If you feel leaving the notice on a particular editor's page would inflame the tensions, let me know, and I'll do it.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
04:30, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
sockpuppetry – Similar to others that have since been protected for at least a month, this article has been the target of a LTA who keeps creating new sockpuppets every week (see
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Norprobr for more info).
Hirschrdam is the latest obvious sock (restoring
Jordinesi's edit). No point in reverting them while the article is unprotected, otherwise they'll just create another one as usual.
M.Bitton (
talk)
11:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Ritchie333: the sockpuppetry is obvious. I usually report their new socks to
WP:AIV, but from past experience, all that does is encourage them to create plenty more socks in a short space of time. If you could at least protect the article for now (until the admins who are familiar with the LTA's case turn up), that would be a great help. If you're not comfortable with the idea, that's fine too (it can wait I guess). Thanks.
M.Bitton (
talk)
12:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined: While there is a persistent issue of addition of unsourced content, it's very irregular and over a long period of time. I doubt a short protection would do much of anything, and a longer one would be overkill.
Isabelle Belato🏳🌈12:15, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Extended confirmed protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This should help for now. I imagine someone on a social media website mentioned this article, which resulted in an increase in disruptive editing.
Isabelle Belato🏳🌈12:17, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Taylor Parsons is a transgender rock climber and I suspect that she is the person causing the disruption, but refuses to engage on the Talk Page where the WikiProject LGBTQ+ has been engaged. A period of protection would help here.
Aszx5000 (
talk)
10:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: IP user edits frequently, insisting on historicity, without providing any sourcing or seemingly even reading the article or followings links
jengod (
talk)
17:16, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I almost declined this, but given the intersection of 3 CTOPS, likely better to just keep IPs away for a few days.
Courcelles (
talk)
19:37, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – There seems to be a swarm of IP addresses making edit requests for adding the Andrew Tate and Tucker Carlson interview to the article, despite consensus going against that.
Deauthorized. (
talk)19:06, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Persistent addition of unsourced content, IP-hopping editor has been adding an unsourced claim since November 2022 that it is "Widely considered the Montreal of Dublin".
Waxworker (
talk)
20:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: The page, which is in the contentious area, is under constant attack of pro-Ukrainian POV pushers and has not see good IP edits for a long time. It has been protected before. Could we please have it long-term protected?
Ymblanter (
talk)
05:30, 18 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Higher level of IP vandalism as the Victoria Governement has cancelled the games. Temporary protection may be needed.
Otchiman (
talk)
00:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined The article has to be protected as a whole; we can't selectively protect only parts of it. So unless we get a spin-off article for the period you're talking about, this is a no-go. Courtesy @
El C:09:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Lectonar (
talk)reply
Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Since the protection for this page has been expired, there has been edit warring going on about removing and adding content on the page. Some IPs are performing the edit warring.
Sahas P. (
talk)
12:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC)reply
User(s)
blocked:
62.211.233.175 (
talk·contribs). for 2 weeks from mainspace since they have been making similar edits to several article. They can use the respective article talkpages to propose and develop consensus for the changes, if they wish. @
Paper9oll: Ping me if they hop IPs instead.
Abecedare (
talk)
15:30, 18 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection: Subject involved in a current happening. IP and new users creating havoc. Unverified and unrefernced claims and edits leading to edit war some times. Shaan SenguptaTalk17:27, 18 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing. Continuous disruption regarding inserting "1 fishing boat" into the infobox, sometimes removing "1 Pohang-class corvette" in the process. There was an RfC on the talk page, and there was unanimous consensus was to not include the fishing boat. A comment alerting users, directly in the infobox, has failed to dissuade users from disrupting it.
Edward-Woodrow :) [
talk19:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – The article has been vandalized persistently. The page protection is needed to prevent further instances of vandalism and safeguard the integrity of the information presented.
Arthur Hirai (
talk)
23:13, 18 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. The recent reverted edits mostly seem to be good faith edits lacking a source. Please warn the user(s) appropriately and if they continue report them to
WP:ANI.
Daniel Quinlan (
talk)
02:27, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Note: As far as I can see, discussions are still ongoing. As long as we have no consensus in any which way, I don't think unprotection is called for. Just my 2 cents, though.
Lectonar (
talk)
06:58, 18 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: This is the admin account for Auburn University's Office of Communications and Marketing. The user
/info/en/?search=User:Drmies is not affiliated with Auburn University and should not be the admin of this page. I request access to edit and protect page and serve as admin.
AuburnOCM (
talk)
13:46, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Never to late to follow the instructions at the top of this section: Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page.@
Kaiser matias: How say you?
Favonian (
talk)
13:23, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks for pinging me. I honestly can't recall what led to this, and am a little surprised at the length there. So no issue changing it, and welcome the move even.
Kaiser matias (
talk)
19:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: IPs consistently updating article before matches end (falling into live updates - which are not allowed) and incomplete updates, messing the article up. I've mentioned that on edit summaries before, but it still happens.
Gsfelipe94 (
talk)
02:48, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of three days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The article has not yet been protected (surprising to me, given the subject), and recent vandalism only seemed to hit it today. We'll see how this goes ... I did add a CTOPS notice to the talk page.
Daniel Case (
talk)
21:33, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: This BLP has for some time been the target of IPs attempting to add unsourced and probably untrue information about her personal life.
PatGallacher (
talk)
21:41, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Several IP accounts have made edits reflecting that the band has broken up. The information is almost guaranteed to be true, but they aren't providing citations; all they're doing is changing their active years from 1992-present to 1992-2023 and occasionally changing the verbs in their intro from "is" to "was."
The information has not been reported yet by a reputable or secondary source, and the only statement the band has made so far is behind a paywall on Patreon. (Also, given what I've heard about what sparked the [likely] breakup, I highly suspect this page will be heavily and contentiously edited in upcoming days/weeks.)
Afddiary (
talk)
23:10, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – The article has been reverted persistently of its original content, including birth date. The page protection is needed to prevent further instances of vandalism and safeguard the integrity of the information presented.
Arthur Hirai (
talk)
23:51, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – The article has been vandalized persistently. The IP address keeps changing the original content without explanation. Taking everything into consideration, the page protection is needed to prevent further instances of vandalism and safeguard the integrity of the information presented.
Arthur Hirai (
talk)
23:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – He has reportedly be traded, however, neither team involved in the trade has confirmed it it's based solely on anonymous sources to NFL insiders. There are hidden notes in article with advertisements not to edit the article until the announcement is made and this is being ignored. Rockchalk71703:33, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – IP and new user "not to be confused with Great Britain" vandalism resuming within a day of the previous six month semi-protection expiring.
Belbury (
talk)
08:46, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Change "The 2020 edition of U.S. News & World Report ranks Auburn as tied for the 97th best national university overall in the U.S., tied for 40th among public universities, and 164th in "Best Value Schools".[23]" to "The 20220 edition of U.S. News & World Report ranks Auburn as tied for the 97th best national university overall in the U.S., tied for 420thnd among public universities, and 164th in "Best Value Schools".[23]"
Marybeth at Auburn OCM (
talk)
17:41, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Change "Auburn University owns and operates the 423-acre (1.71 km2) Auburn University Regional Airport, providing flight education and fuel, maintenance, and airplane storage. The Auburn University Aviation Department is fully certified by the FAA as an Air Agency with examining authority for private, commercial, instrument, and multiengine courses. In April 2015, Auburn University received the nation's first FAA approval to operate a new Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight School as part of the Auburn University Aviation Center.[50] The College of Business's Department of Aviation Management and Supply Chain Management is the only program" to "Auburn University owns and operates the 423-acre (1.71 km2) Auburn University Regional Airport, providing flight education and fuel, maintenance, and airplane storage. The Auburn University School of Aviation is fully certified by the FAA as an Air Agency with examining authority for private, commercial, instrument, and multiengine courses. In April 2015, Auburn University received the nation's first FAA approval to operate a new Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight School as part of the Auburn University Aviation Center.[50] The Harbert College of Business's Department of Supply Chain Management is the only program"
Marybeth at Auburn OCM (
talk)
17:45, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: There is a high level of content being added to this article that is unsourced and not relevant. Various editors keep removing this content and its being re-added in. This is an active event that will go on for 2 weeks. Request for a (2) week page protection status.
Sputink (
talk)
11:37, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Page is being actively brigaded on 4chan, though this may subside in the next couple of hours. See /v/thread/644727324
Rinbro (
talk)
23:19, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: An IP editor is removing cited content they disagree with, identifying inclusion of it as spam or vandalism, and does not respond well to being asked to wait until a consensus is decided.
Cukie Gherkin (
talk)
23:30, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: How can a discussion page be extended protected? This prevents even RECOMMENDING edits to the already 'extended protected' biography.
169.226.135.72 (
talk)
19:14, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: There's this constant edit warring happening towards the article for the past days along with some unregistered IP users. Is there a way we can limit edits done by a specific user or have the edits reviewed by another editor? It's getting annoying to frank.
TDKR Chicago 101 (
talk)
20:12, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: since March, a varying IP has been adding nonsense, they have used multiple IPs but I think it's the same person.
LibStar (
talk)
04:54, 21 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: This page protection level is uplifted to extended protection about 3 years ago due to occasion of vandalism. The protection is not relevant anymore. Semi-protection is preferable now. Already discussed with the admin who protect but don't get any reply.
2001:EE0:1A18:764F:A5DE:E626:1C67:4486 (
talk)
10:08, 21 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. It was protected due to sockpuppetry...which I don't see having gone away in the meantime. Also I can see not attempt at discussion with the last protecting admin.
Lectonar (
talk)
10:44, 21 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Once again, numerous cases of disruptive editing, vandalism, and unsourced material being added.
Edwordo13 (
talk)
23:27, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Page is being actively brigaded on 4chan, though this may subside in the next couple of hours. See /v/thread/644727324
Rinbro (
talk)
23:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Change "College of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences" to "College of Forestry, Wildlife and Environment"
Change "Most recent developments include an $83 million academic classroom and laboratory complex with a seating capacity of 2,000 students in 20 adaptable classrooms and laboratories, six EASL classrooms, and five lecture halls.A new 800-seat central dining hall with reservable dining and study areas as well as retail options is also part of the complex.[58] [59] Completed in August 2022, the Tony and Libba Rane Culinary Science Center combines instructional and laboratory space with operational food venues and hotel spaces in which students can obtain experiential real-world training.[60]The new college of education building, scheduled to open in 2024" to "Most recent developments include an $83 million academic classroom and laboratory complex (ACLC) with a seating capacity of 2,000 students in 20 adaptable classrooms and laboratories, six EASL classrooms, and five lecture halls. A new 800-seat central dining hall with reservable dining and study areas as well as retail options is also part of the complex.[58] [59] Opened in August 2022, the Tony and Libba Rane Culinary Science Center combines instructional and laboratory space with operational food venues and hotel spaces in which students can obtain experiential real-world training.[60]The new college of education building, scheduled to open in 2025"
Marybeth at Auburn OCM (
talk)
17:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection:BLP policy violations – Reocurring addition of un- or poorly sourced, controversial information is being added to a BLP.
Cerebral726 (
talk)
15:49, 21 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Constant edit warring over presentation of list; talk page discussion and mediation seemed to briefly work but has not stopped it. Given they are confirmed users who behaved for a break and then went back to it, a higher and longer level of protection is requested, to force them to discuss without editing and stick to it. I have reverted to a stable version already. See also
comment at my talkpage.
Kingsif (
talk)
23:04, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Commentary:I do agree with this, the more people go to talk page and discuss about the article, the better, i saw many editors (the ones that edited outside the editwar) wenting to edit instead of even check talk pages, i do agree this is a good measure.
Meganinja202 (
talk)
23:17, 20 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I am in favor as temporary prevension measure, from i had read, he had threaten to evade block and I am afraid he may disrrupt consensus when he be back from his block
Meganinja202 (
talk)
16:08, 21 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the reply, but it seems that things have subsided. I did see that the user said they might edit as an IP while blocked. If that happens we can protect the page then.
Isabelle Belato🏳🌈17:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Seeing how he recently passed away and is currently on the main page, the massive amount of page views this article will/has receiving since his passing will make this page vulnerable to IP vandalism. Maybe a short-term page protection is preemptively needed
TDKR Chicago 101 (
talk)
18:26, 21 July 2023 (UTC)reply
This is a followup to
this request. Thank you so much, though only two weeks will be pretty futile against a 4 year LTA. I had assumed that would include the Talk pages lol. The abuser is aggressively trolling Talk pages, and that's now half the content of
Talk:Kansas City metropolitan area. So how do we handle that? Delete the entire threads, including responses by the willfully trolled? Or just archive it? I don't think the discussions are legitimately productive, but mostly trolling anyway, not that it matters because
WP:SOCKPUPPETWP:DENY. — Smuckola(talk)09:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The current IP has been blocked but protection seemed desirable. If you really meant full protection, please explain why. I don't think edit warring will continue with semi protection.
Johnuniq (
talk)
03:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: This is the second time I ask for protection for this page. Anonymous users change whatever they want about the data, no moderation, free of any careful about the correctness of the article. I will no revert the current vandalism, looks like waste of time do it again.
B777-300ER (
talk)
03:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I think it was something to do with edit section links appearing on the headings when they weren't supposed to? Anyways, doesn't seem like it's needed anymore so Unprotected.
Legoktm (
talk)
07:33, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I suppose sandboxes should not be protected and a couple that I checked had a trivial number of transclusions (from 2 to 16). However, the whole idea of
User:MusikBot II/TemplateProtector is that it saves a lot of time and argument by uniformly applying a set of agreed protections. There are only two exclusions at the
config and we are not going to add these sandboxes although that would probably be unnecessary. Before wasting the time of the bot operator, I'll ask here if anyone knows whether the bot should have unprotected these pages? I'm wondering if it is a glitch that they have not been unprotected or whether the bot only unprotects pages that it earlier protected.
Johnuniq (
talk)
03:58, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Noorullah: You might have intended this for
WP:RPPI (requests to increase protection). I left a warning at the talk page of the other user but you also need to try and engage with them on article talk. Protection will not help resolve the disagreement.
Johnuniq (
talk)
03:40, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: user are notable & verified with all social platform.Many user miss use of this page & delete again & again so its fix & no edit require in future.User have google panel also available.
182.68.236.44 (
talk)
05:39, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
This template sandbox was protected around the same time as we implemented a lot of our site-wide preventative numerical-based template protections due to ongoing vandalism. I suspect this one was accidental, since obviously a sandbox is not going to be transcluded much of anywhere.
Primefac (
talk)
09:15, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Disruptive editing by IP/s. 150.9.102.222 has made 5 reverts in just over 24 hrs and a similar IP made two earlier edits to the same content, suggesting they may be the same individual editor. Could take this to AN3 but different IPs involved suggest that it would not be effective.
Cinderella157 (
talk)
09:49, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – A month-long protection against persistent vandalism this past month, which would likely continue after July 22. If such edits persist after the protection gets lifted, perhaps a second, more extended protection may be added.
Carlinal (
talk)
14:50, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: High level of IP vandalisms and un-referenced changes. Seems these users wants to shape the page according their spoils, rather than standard sections and layouts. Already restored previous versions a couple of times only in the last week
Riktetta (
talk)
11:11, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: There is a couple of non-annon users that repeatedly move details around on the page (without rhyme or reason), and they continue to add information that is not sourced. They additionally add random statements and formatting that does not follow WP standards. They have been asked several times in the edit histories to follow WP formatting, but they will not do so.
DisneyMetalhead (
talk)
14:08, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I would like to request that please add the given content. And I will also request to please update the flag according to the flag's latest version present in commons because the colour code of the flag in this file is incorrect. I tried adding the flag in my
user page infobox from commons but this file is coming there. It is pathetic that I can't add commons file there.
Just for your reference please see the
file on commons which is the original one.
Not done: I have updated the file as requested separately below. The description is maintained on Commons, with semi-protection.
~ ToBeFree (
talk)
02:42, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Frequent vandalising by portraying his slapping of a contestant on a reality show as an act of gender equality.
Blarrck (
talk)
15:25, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: I'd like access to these 3 pages to address the Fostered content and other
WP:LINT errors found within. First two are exadmin in good standing who have not edited within the last 12 months and were selfprotected, so asking the protecting admin prior to this request is not necessary. Third one was protected by former Admin
User:Wknight94 (retired and last edit was two years ago), so I also don't feel I'd get a reply. I have Extended Confirmed access, so that or lower is fine, whatever level is appropriate for each.
If I have overlooked anything that would be an issue, I am happy to discuss anything if you have further questions. Thank you.
Zinnober9 (
talk)
07:02, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Seconding this request, not because I will help with the linting but because I have a similar weirdly obsessive lint-fixing request directly above and feel the pain here. jp×g09:22, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Subject to current major event in Russia-Ukraine war, now subject to constant unsourced subjective edits, requires protection until details are confirmed.
Anonposeidon (
talk)
00:06, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Highly related to ukraine war, and has had 7 reverts in the past 3 months or so. It has a consistent pattern of occasional vandalism.
El Wikipedian (
talk)
10:44, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Other major figures, espically generals, are extended confirmed protected and have less vandalism. Maybe semi protection might be better, but this warrants some form of protection.
El Wikipedian (
talk)
10:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I'd recommend leaving this protected - sandboxes should generally not be protected due to risk level, but can be due to vandalism, as has happened. The protection will expire in a month anyway.
* Pppery *it has begun...15:44, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Why on God's green Earth has this been fully-protected for nearly a decade? At any rate, I need to change Signpost/Quote to Signpost/Templates/Quote. jp×g03:04, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Is five years nearly a decade,
JPxG? I suppose it rounds up...
The ed17 is the protecting administrator. Maybe some level of protection, in line with the user's talk page, as a trial? They've been targeted for some time.
Sdrqaz (
talk)
09:24, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Sdrqaz: I suppose it doesn't matter a whole lot either way -- I just want the template to be switched over and apart from that I have no strong preference about the protection level (although it does seem very strange and unusual). jp×g09:30, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Persistent and consistent attempts to insert partisan political commentary and to present it as fact with no valid supporting citations. Roughly a dozen attempts to make roughly the same invalid change have occurred within the past month, despite a week long protection previously being put in place during that same period.
Beofett (
talk)
20:21, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – For over a week now there has been persistent vandalism from different IP users changing the actor's birth year without explaining why.
Telenovelafan215 (
talk)
04:03, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of
dispute resolution. The IP is citing sources and referring to the Talk page. Maybe it's egregiously, stupidly wrong (I am not a Roman military history expert) but appears to be a good faith dispute. Steven Walling •
talk02:47, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: BLP Policy Violations. Persistent BLP violations, being a high profile popular football player attracts disruption, has been protected on several occasions in recent times so requesting indefinite protection for now.
TylerBurden (
talk)
20:51, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. This was last protected in April for a bit, and while athletes with trade rumors often require temporary protection, jumping to indefinite semi-protection is a bit extreme. Steven Walling •
talk06:12, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Hopefully that should be sufficient to actually close the AFD given the level of activity so far, but if it's re-listed and needs extension then feel free to request again. Steven Walling •
talk06:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Long-term edit warring continued by dynamic IP recently that continues to reinsert edits after being asked to use the talk page. Seems to be an unlogged account based on their comments and behavior (
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/145.224.75.231) associated with Megalogastor where
Asian giant hornet had to recently be protected for similar issues. Can't pin down if it's sockpuppetry, but hopefully semi-protection deals with it either way.
KoA (
talk)
14:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite full protection: Persistent
vandalism on the article from a connected IP address:
185.69.144.60 and
86.15.93.32. Not only should any of those and any connected accounts be indefinitely blocked, but this page should be indefinitely protected as well, in case any IP users perform similar actions.
BrickMaster02 (
talk)
15:58, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection: Long history of frequent and numerous IP edits changing origin of the dosa to various locations in India against cited sources. Also features promotion and vandalism.
Dawkin Verbier (
talk)
17:35, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Quite possibly one of the most vandalised articles since its creation, can I request a permanent protection? Similar to the one on
VanossGaming (I'm not familiar with the process), as I'm certain that this high traffic article would be much better off with it.
Idiosincrático (
talk)
06:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. The article was previously under a year long semi-protection 2021-2022, and given the level of vandalism an attempt at using pending changes long term is appropriate here to try, though I am open to revising this obviously since a year is a long time and we've tried this once before as well. Indefinite semi-protection may unfortunately be required. Steven Walling •
talk06:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined "A page and its talk page should not normally be protected at the same time." If there is a continued wave of edits we can revisit. Steven Walling •
talk06:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite pending changes: An anonymous user in different IPv6 addresses keeps adding genres without citing a reliable source in the past month.
♒️ 98TIGERIUS 🐯21:36, 23 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: To protect a website for my school that I update and edit with the truth so it doesn't get vandalised or changed from the truth and since it's so far a reliable source for research if it could be protected to extended confirmed thank you
PUG1423 (
talk)
07:12, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Because this is your school doesn't means the article has to be protected. (also article is somewhat stable) There had been requests about protecting the article about their parents or institutions and got rejected.
ToadetteEdit(
chat)/(
logs)07:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Kindly increase the page protection as many people are maliciously editing the page to claim him from their castes. This will ensure only documented and properly cited references are allowed and factually correct information is displayed.
Kshatriya Yoddha (
talk)
09:52, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – This season has not started yet, but a Canada-based IP-hopper has been vandalizing this redirect. Temporary protection required until we get this article up and running later this year.
Areaseven (
talk)
03:53, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Whatever the fuck was the reason for the protection (apologies for the colorful language, but it's the only way I could describe it) came back when the page protection expired. LilianaUwU(
talk /
contributions)09:53, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – IP user is disruptively editing the page and overriding the consensus of three other users, see the reverts by me and another user, and on the talk page where 3 total users align with the consensus.
Noorullah (
talk)
09:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Discrediting sources from the President of the International Sports Hall of Fame, and the official website by IPs.
Nir007H (
talk)
09:59, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary pending changes:BLP policy violations – Most IP edits are a variety of unsourced alterations to the subject's (unknown and framed as "age as of date") date of birth.
Belbury (
talk)
11:44, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. And I have put a CTOPS notice on the talk page (BLP although GENSEX may also cover this).
Daniel Case (
talk)
21:49, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Soccer player rumoured to be signing for Premier League club Everton, but it’s not a done deal yet. Various IPs keep updating the article as though the transfer has happened. Continually reverting is becoming tiresome - semi protection for a few days will allow the deal to be done (or not).
Neiltonks (
talk)
16:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined. It's hard to know for sure that this isn't a content dispute. I'm no geography expert, and no source is provided for the district that the peak is in. There's also some unexplained removal going on, but it's a minority of the edits.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
02:33, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary extended confirmed protection:BLP policy violations – recent edits claiming he is deceased, unconfirmed at time of request. All my warmest wishes,
ItsKesha (
talk)
21:13, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. The blocked accounts were over a month ago. The edits by the IP don't seem like sockpuppetry either.
Sdrqaz (
talk)
05:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. Apart from a single IP edit on 25 July, IP edits before that were on 16 July.
Sdrqaz (
talk)
05:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: High level of IP disruption. IPs are repeatedly attempting to alter a recently deceased person's age without providing any sources to verify these claims. On the other hand, the available sources reporting on her death, verify the opposite of what the IPs claim. To me, this smells
WP:Vandalism. Therefore, I request a raise in page protection to protect the article. - ❖ SilentResident ❖(
talk ✉ |
contribs ✎)21:45, 24 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
GnocchiFan I've semiprotected for 2 weeks. Issues seem to be IP-generated and your request gave no reason for why such drastic protection level would be needed. Let me know if there is evidence that requires such a level
Nosebagbear (
talk)
12:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Has been vandalised twice now by an anonymous vandal that constantly changes IPs. Other pages vandalised multiple times by the same person have been protected (
Pandorina kutija,
Jače manijače). I think the fact that this user has continued to vandalise pages even after multiple blocks and page protections shows that they will do it again, and they seem to like this page specifically.
Suntooooth, it/he (
talk/
contribs)
14:33, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: BLP Policy Violations. Child amount related BLP violations continuing shortly after last protection expired, recommend also restoring protection to partner's article
Alida Morberg where the same is occurring.
TylerBurden (
talk)
20:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
There are also tones of edit warring from both sides here, though the IP would certainly appear more at fault. The IPs appear to be within a range, so someone with desktop access might consider non-protection methods to force a discussion on the talk page.
Nosebagbear (
talk)
12:40, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Consensus was reached on talk to stay with 'narrative' form for examples, to avoid drive-by additions of recent usage (which tends to be thrown around with abandon). Persistent IP editor(s) keep reverting to 'list' format. cheers.
anastrophe,
an editor he is.20:41, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined The two of them have taken it to talk pages, although
this has not gone well. Should they resume I think it would be better to partial-block both of them if they do not clearly violate 3RR or otherwise edit war. There is no reason all editors, or all other editors, or even any other editors, should be barred from this page because of these two.
I have also put a CTOPS notice (AP2) on the talk page (although, to be fair, these two are the only ones so far to my knowledge who have contended over it).
Daniel Case (
talk)
23:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary move protection: Page-move vandalism – Current disruptive movements between titles without gaining consensus that have to be reverted by page movers and administrators. The editor in question received a block and continued moving the page back, was reverted, moved the page back again, and was blocked again temporarily. EggRoll97(
talk) 20:21, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: The page was protected due to recurrent vandalism after the person in question told his YouTube audience to edit his Wikipedia page. This was years ago, and the attention on this particuar video has reduced significantly.
This person fits the notability requirements, so with the previous point, I believe that keeping the page permanently deleted is in violation of the
deletion policy.
Declined It was protected because of repeated attempts to recreate the page despite being deleted via discussion. And the protecting admin,
Stwalkerster, last edited yesterday. Use
WP:AFC to write a draft and get it accepted, then we'll unprotect. –
Muboshgu (
talk)
23:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Yeah. My block log will show the, all this morning. A lot of focus on various road transport articles, usually four or five socks per article. It’s entirely too late for me to go through tonight and clean everything up properly, but I’ll try and take a look tomorrow. Thanks for spotting this mess, @
LilianaUwU.
Courcelles (
talk)
04:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Repeated blanking of cited content without discussion by multiple SPAs and IP accounts.
Escape Orbit(Talk)10:33, 26 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – He is in the news after being charged for insider trading, quite a few IP editors have added slanderous comments,.
Devokewater16:13, 26 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection:BLP policy violations – "Infrequently edited pages with high levels of [...] BLP violations [...] from unregistered and new users." - nearly all edits are correcting or disputing the subject's date of birth, with no sourcing (it's currently only sourced to "age as of date").
Belbury (
talk)
09:13, 26 July 2023 (UTC)reply
It's infrequent but it's ongoing. False/unsourced DOBs are basically the only IP edits the article gets, and some of the edits have remained in place unchecked for months.
Belbury (
talk)
13:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)reply
I've got it watchlisted and can help with the unsourced age/DOB reverts. I'd consider at least pending changes protection if this level of slow-but-steady disruption continues.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
14:21, 26 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. There's now an edit filter to prevent them from creating the page. —
Ingenuity (
talk •
contribs)
14:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Favonian: Thanks for the ping. It gave me a chance to review the protection I executed. I don't remember why I made the protection indefinite; that may have been a mistake. If you think it's prudent to review, please do.
Tiderolls19:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. But I count only 8 disruptive edits since 2021, out of about a dozen+ edits or so.
Lectonar (
talk)
06:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: It's been 4 years since this article was protected. Any vandals would be long gone. I asked the protecting admin to unprotect but received no response.
LibStar (
talk)
12:58, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Pending-changes protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. I have met you halfway, and downgraded to pending-changes protection. India-related articles are unfortunately somewhat prone to vandalism and disruption, so I have watchlisted and will have an eye on it, ready to re-up if disruption gets too pronounced. Courtesy @
Materialscientist:.
Lectonar (
talk)
13:20, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of
dispute resolution. You already have engaged the other user on their talk-page...take it from there; dispute about sources is not automatically disruptive.
Lectonar (
talk)
12:27, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection – 10 of the last 25 edits to this page have been disruptive edits by different IP users, the subject of the article is controversial so it is likely these edits will not stop if given time. –
Treetoes023 (
talk)
07:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to
justify protection. For a TFA this is really, reaaallly slow. TFAs are well watched normally (although not here...30 I am the 31st watcher now). I think the topic doesn't appeal to vandals, overall. If another admin wants to protect, go right ahead.
Lectonar (
talk)
13:12, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: user attacked page adding one few years old source but refuses to update all other better sourced clubs and leagues which use its correct capacity, please protect or ban him at least.
93.140.103.186 (
talk)
12:44, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Created by a sockpuppet, not targeted by a filter, so why not create-protect this deleted page?.
Notrealname1234 (
talk)
16:30, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: The page has many inaccuracies. For one, it states that Biden's diary was sold to Project Veritas, which is not true. PV actually facilitated the turnover of the diary to the FBI.
It also omits the fact that she was in rehab for drug use and left the diary and other belongings behind.
107.77.197.67 (
talk)
16:07, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the ping :)
Dr.Pinsky, as
Raj Hanse had been warned about edit warring before and has a history of disruptive editing in this area, I have partially blocked them for 3 months. The problem seems to be user-specific enough to be resolved by a block.
~ ToBeFree (
talk)
20:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Not done I warned the /64 and would consider a block if their BLP-vio is repeated. Otherwise, there's not too much disruption. Incidentally, I'm increasing the protection level at the article itself (ECP indef) per
WP:GS/RUSUKR and some evidence of disruption there.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs)
19:24, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: @
Daniel Case please raise the protection level to extended confirmed protection as the vandal has a confirmed account and is still persistently continuing with their disruptive editing.
Red Phoenician (
talk)
22:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Witchcraft is under protection during DR, but one editor seems to be bringing the dispute over the same wording to this article while the case is still active.
Skyerise (
talk)
22:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Worldcoin is a scam run by prolific cyber criminals, the current page strongly suggests a legitimacy which is highly misleading and entirely incorrect, rendering Wikipedia complicit. The page requires editing to represent the facts about Worldcoin.
2A00:23C6:6590:CE01:6CDE:4B79:B40C:9DAA (
talk)
23:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Please request your edit below and not here, as this article is protected due to Arbitration Enforcement, it may be rejected if your edit request may be controversial.
ToadetteEdit(
chat)/(
logs)07:50, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Persistent
disruptive editing – Requesting protection for this page because of constant disruption by an editor using fringe partisan sources. No independent source added for "more than forty five" killed by a single soldier. Also
WP:GS/AA user.
KhndzorUtogh (
talk)
12:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – BLP (footballer) being vandalized by multiple IPs. One repetitive IP already reported to AIV, but there are several others making similar edits.
Schazjmd(talk)14:49, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and edits against the MOS that it's not feasible to keep reverting. Ss11204:24, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Once again since having page protection removed, the page is being heavily vandalised by IP addresses. Suggest a 3 month lock now to counteract this.
RM-Taylor (
talk)
06:51, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent
vandalism – Vandalism, ideology warriors, addition of unsourced content, and disruptive editing by IPs and registered accounts. Keep in mind that there is a parliamentary election in Poland this year (October/November) so this will most likely continue up until then if the article remains unprotected.
Vacant0 (
talk)
08:31, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent
disruptive editing –
WP:CASTE additions by a cross-wiki dedicated disruptor who has already been warned after abusing me in edit summaries on
hiwiki on the same article. I also request the page protector to warn this user for unsourced and disruptive (do not want to deal with this abuser further).
Gotitbro (
talk)
18:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent
sockpuppetry – With IJBall unfortunately no longer part of the community for the foreseeable and unforeseeable future, I am requesting indefinite semi-protection due to recent disruption by block-evading IPs that are still continuing to pop up. With IJBall no longer editing, I don't see any reason for IPs to be editing this page, especially since recently any time it's an IP, it's always a sockpuppet.
Amaury •
21:08, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Rampant edit-warring to include references to Pakistan and Pakistani cuisine. Please protect for a few weeks (two, three, four, your call). Thanks. Julietdeltalima(talk)23:52, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Extended confirmed protection: The article has been edited for months by a considerable number of new accounts and IPs who do not explain major changes with edit summaries, keep adding and removing content, and in some cases revert each other. A signiciant number of those edits have been reverted as unconstructive. While the protection might prevent good contributions, the amount of unexplained additions and removals of content (especially in the infobox) might be way worse. An admin taking a look could be helpful.
Ktrimi991 (
talk)
22:24, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: High level of ip/SPA activity over the past moth repeatedly vandalizing or removing referenced information.
Hipal (
talk)
02:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Dishonest reports, abusing process in the hope of gaining the upper hand in the dispute they've decided to create. Quite disgusting behaviour from
User:ToadetteEdit especially - the account seems devoted to disruption only. I removed an image gallery because it served no encyclopaedic purpose. These disruptive editors have not been able to do the most basic thing necessary here, which is to say what they think the encyclopaedic purpose is. But they are not interested in the article or in content guidelines - their sole aim is to revert for the sake of reverting.
185.104.138.30 (
talk)
07:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)reply
This is a second followup to
this request. I don't know if anybody ever saw my last posting of this request. Thank you so much, though only two weeks will be pretty futile against a
4 year LTA. I had assumed that would include the Talk pages lol. The abuser is aggressively trolling Talk pages, and that's now half the content of
Talk:Kansas City metropolitan area. So how do we handle that? Delete the entire threads, including responses by the willfully trolled? Or just archive it? Can an admin do that for me? I don't think the discussions are legitimately productive, but mostly trolling anyway, not that it matters because
WP:SOCKPUPPETWP:BLOCKEVASIONWP:DENY. — Smuckola(talk)11:08, 28 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.. I only protect the requested talk page, since others have not seen disruption for a couple of weeks. If the sock returns pls renominate.--
Ymblanter (
talk)
08:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Persistent removal of sourced content by new users. The content, by some strange coincidence, is critical to Putin.
Ymblanter (
talk)
08:05, 29 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: I realize this may be
WP:BOLD, but I don't see why
WP:SALT can't apply here. The article has been nominated for deletion 5 times already and has failed to be removed each time. I'm concerned that there's going to be more attempts, wasting editors time and turning this into a slot machine game where you have to play 100 times to hit the jackpot.
KatoKungLee (
talk)
14:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
sockpuppetry – New sock of RAPO23 making the same edits, SPI filed but as they continued the edits with a new account the next day, semi protection needed to stop this. Ravensfire (
talk)
16:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Many IPs and unexperienced editors are changing information, either vandalism or simply not reading notes. Most of them are related to the Unnamed Subtropical Storm, the most often currently is changing what the strongest storm is. I will bring up a discussion at
WP:WPTC about strongest storm soon.
✶Mitch199811✶23:01, 29 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Daniel Quinlan The last 8 edits, all done within 2 hours, were all related to either vandalism or the strongest storm dispute. And previously today, Unnamed was changed to 90L. There are comments under Unnamed stating to change the name. As far as I can tell, a footnote explaining the fact is unnamed has never been done before.✶Mitch199811✶23:14, 29 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Mitch199811: Perhaps it would help to add a separate "Strongest hurricane" section since this is an article about hurricanes. Or perhaps make some other much more visible change to discourage incorrect edits like these. It looks like most of these edits were made using the visual editor and most if not all of these appear to be good faith edits even if they are incorrect. If it gets significantly worse, feel free to resubmit the RfPP.
Daniel Quinlan (
talk)
23:34, 29 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – The overwhelming majority, if not all of the edits of the last three years have been reverted as vandalism.
M.Bitton (
talk)
11:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary extended confirmed protection: This article is a hot topic and is going to be controversial as soon as election season in Pakistan comes, in order to make sure that conscious and reasonable WikiPedian users contribute, the security of this article must be increased. ⭐️ Starkex ⭐️ 📧 ✍️ 19:44, 30 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: High level of IP vandalism. Had temporary protection a couple years ago, but vandal interest is ongoing. Recent edits are almost exclusively vandalism and reverts.
Juan el Demografo (
talk)
00:07, 31 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Extended-confirmed protection: Please provide extended-confirmed protection for 10 days due to violation of
WP:FUTURE and persistent addition of poorly sourced material.
Imsaneikigai (
talk)
15:17, 30 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: High level of IP edit warring over the numbering of the latest season of Futurama currently airing on Hulu.
IP editors are trying to number it season 11 based on Hulu's official naming from broadcast order, but the page explicitly has historically used production order (after much prior debate, see talk page). Production order would make the latest season number 8. It seems the IP editors are not attempting any discussion in the talk page, and are not updating the rest of the seasons to use the broadcast season numbering, so it is likely these are troll edits rather than serious attempts to switch the page to broadcast order.
I'm requesting a short duration (1 month? 2 weeks?) protection, either using pending changes or semi-protection to help quiet the edit war.
I don't see anything in the linked 'justify' article indicating how much activity is enough to warrant protection. For future reference, could you link the specific section that specifies the criteria?
BBUCommander (
talk)
21:41, 19 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Extended confirmed protection: Persistent
vandalism – The article has continuously been reverted to its initial content, once more after the page protection period ended. The responsible party remains an anonymous user. To prevent additional instances of vandalism and maintain the integrity of the information provided, Extended confirmed protection is necessary. Your kind consideration in this matter is greatly valued.
Arthur Hirai (
talk)
02:34, 31 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: The article is subjected to frequent edits by IPs or later blocked accounts, deleting sourced material and adding unsourced claims and outright bullshit instead. Edits often have to be reverted.
SapereAudete (
talk)
21:32, 30 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Hello, in the past month I've addressed nearly all of the fostered content errors on user talk pages, and have 10 remaining on full protected pages. The three I'd like assistance on fixing today are the following archives of Master Jay's. I
contacted Master Jay last week for one of these errors hoping to open dialogue and get all three addressed, but have had no response. If you would be willing, would you make the following adjustments?
{| style="vertical-align:top" |
<div id="Awardbar" class="noprint" style="border:1px solid #FFDF00; background:#fff; margin:0.5em 0.5em 0.5em 1em; text-align:center; padding:6px; float:right; font-size: 0.9em; width: 110px; ">This '''Tireless Contributor Barnstar Award''' is presented to<br />[[Image:Barnstar-rotating.gif|100px]]<br />'''<span style="font-size:1.1em;">'''Master Jay'''</span>'''<br />for his silent, yet most impressive efforts to improve this place everyday -<br />you truly are tireless!<span style="font-size:0.8em;"><br />[[User:Phaedriel|<b><span style="color:#009900;">P</span><span style="color:#00AA00;">h</span><span style="color:#00BB00;">a</span><span style="color:#00CC00;">e</span><span style="color:#00DD00;">d</span><span style="color:#00CC00;">r</span><span style="color:#00BB00;">i</span><span style="color:#00AA00;">e</span><span style="color:#009900;">l</span></b>]]<br />19:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC) </span></div>
|}
to
{| style="vertical-align:top"
|<div id="Awardbar" class="noprint" style="border:1px solid #FFDF00; background:#fff; margin:0.5em 0.5em 0.5em 1em; text-align:center; padding:6px; float:right; font-size: 0.9em; width: 110px; ">This '''Tireless Contributor Barnstar Award''' is presented to<br />[[Image:Barnstar-rotating.gif|100px]]<br /><span style="font-size:1.1em;">'''Master Jay'''</span><br />for his silent, yet most impressive efforts to improve this place everyday -<br />you truly are tireless!<span style="font-size:0.8em;"><br />[[User:Phaedriel|<b><span style="color:#009900">P</span><span style="color:#00AA00">h</span><span style="color:#00BB00">a</span><span style="color:#00CC00">e</span><span style="color:#00DD00">d</span><span style="color:#00CC00">r</span><span style="color:#00BB00">i</span><span style="color:#00AA00">e</span><span style="color:#009900">l</span></b>]]<br />19:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC) </span></div>
|}
To correct the fostered content error due to the | placement, the bolding/stripped span error from onion nested bolds, and updates the fonts to span styles to clear the obsoletes.
On
User talk:Master Jay/Archives Jan-Mar 2006 in the "F U" section, add nowiki tags to the bunny art to keep the wikitable notation in the foot from activating and causing a fostered content issue:
Reason: High level of IP vandalism. This page seems to have brigaded by Moroccan nationalists twisting the information on it to misrepresent the vehicle. In particular, there seems to be some sort of shame/hatred about the vehicle's French heritage.
Gnash (
talk)
14:16, 31 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: There has been the addition of Clark's death without a reliable source/or the use of Facebook as the source. This has been constantly reverted, however his death his still being added by IP, newly registered users, etc. Not sure what the move is, but since there's no secondary or reliable source publishing an obituary, we must assume BLP.
TDKR Chicago 101 (
talk)
18:34, 31 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Persistent attempts to claim this person's real name is "Beneful", a
brand of dog food. This
began as obvious vandalism and has moved into more subtle vandalism over the last six months. They've
also claimed that his TV show was named "The Beneful Report", which is blatantly false, Google turns up nothing. The IP has sourced this unlikely claim about his name to a German news website, but it isn't specialist and hasn't done in-depth reporting, and only published this claim after the article was first vandalised, so it's clearly likely to be circular reporting. I've asked the IP for a source showing evidence of in-depth reporting and they've just kept reverting.
Blythwood (
talk)
17:39, 31 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent
vandalism – Recent vandalism from IPs (which I suspect is related to a YouTube video I can't link here). Likely to continue for some time.
GnocchiFan (
talk)
20:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC)reply
This doesn't really matter a whole lot -- who gives a damn if a user talk page from 2008 has a broken link? -- but I figure it is worth mentioning (and why are these pages protected forever anyway?)
For the purposes of these find-replaces, it is probably better to just clip the first parts (i.e. Signpost/Tools/Spamlist -> Signpost/Subscribe) due to variant uses of "Wikipedia:", "WP:", spaces versus underscores, etc etc.jp×g04:14, 22 July 2023 (UTC)reply
@
JPxG I'm going to ping you and then tell the bot to archive this week old untouched section. I've dropped all these pages to Extended Confirmed protection, that should be sufficient to allow maintenance as needed and still perform the goal of the protection. So, Done.
Courcelles (
talk)
20:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: On the talk page of this article, I have laid out how the results that came from the states website were wrong for a county, and also what the correct results were (and how we absolutely know to a certainty what went wrong; this being a typo from a poll worker), yet someone with a dynamic ip address keeps on undoing my edits to fix the error, thereby bringing it back.
Faulkner County, Arkansas needs protection too.
MappedTables (
talk)
16:05, 31 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Reason: Repeated unsourced material and statements being added to the article, just like there was on
After (film series) article previously. I have reverted the same statement that is continually added to these articles, and unsourced.
DisneyMetalhead (
talk)
16:32, 31 July 2023 (UTC)reply