Archives

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

Iroquois (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Lots of recent vandalism. --Think Fast 01:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 01:30, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To Kill a Mockingbird (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Lots of IP vandalism lately, apparently from kids who don't like being assigned to read the book. Deor 01:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 01:30, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ann Coulter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect due to IP edit-warring, looks like IP mockpuppets of a user blocked for WP:3RR. Semi-protection should move the war to the talk page. RJASE1 ^Talk 23:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 00:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yu-Gi-Oh! GX (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect; high level of IP vandalism over the past few days from multiple sources. --Benten 23:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sexual intercourse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect - page recently unprotected due to apparent faith in the goodness of human nature, vandalism underway in earnest. RJASE1 ^Talk 23:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fergie's fourth solo single (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect Due to fan reaction, vandilism is very heavy.69.156.38.77 23:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

McDonald's (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect I know the article gets hit by vandals all the time, but it looks pretty heavy today coming from multiple IPs. EnsRedShirt 23:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Superman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect due to persistent vandalism. RJASE1 ^Talk 23:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Emma Watson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. There is a high level of IP vandalism and one-time editors (who make an account vandalize and never show up again. --EXV // + @ 23:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Italy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Just take a look at the article's recent history. - Regards, Evv 23:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Joseph Boscovich (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

full-protect The article is (again) engaged in a heavy edit war regarding this notable man's ethnic origin. (27th since its foundation) To evade one of the longest edit wars wiki had seen (lasted several weeks), protect immediately and warn the parties to work out a compromise. --PaxEquilibrium 22:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected due to revert warring. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 23:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ZetaBoards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect The article has been IP vandalised three times. This may not sound much but all of this happen every three or four days after one another and there is most likely to be another one soon! - Titan602 22:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 22:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Benedict Arnold (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. Extremely high level of IP vandalism. In the past two weeks, sections of the article have gone missing and it was very time consuming to dig them up again. Anon users continually vandalise the page as well. Admin arjun1 had even listed the page as 'fully protected' which was beyond what I requested, but the tag was never inserted for some reason. 67.87.237.170 21:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 22:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Asian fetish (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protect Article was recently unprotected. But it's still trolled by a bunch of stark-raving anonymous and newly registered accounts that thinks the whole article should be deleted and that flood the article with edits before coming to consensus. Please return it to full protection. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 21:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infant (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect Persistant vandalism by anonymous users. Ciotog 20:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 21:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kottonmouth Kings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. War wizard90 20:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 20:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jimbo Wales has suggested semi-protection may be used in cases of "...minor [biographies] of slightly well known but controversial individuals..." which are not widely watchlisted, if they are "...subject to POV pushing, trolling, [or] vandalism." In such cases, semi-protection "...would at least eliminate the drive-by nonsense that we see so often." This article isn't about a person but a group that falls under these exact circumstances and considering this article there is plenty of recent activity to justify protection at this time. I do watchlist it, but I can't always be here to revert any vandalism. Please reconsider. War wizard90 20:32, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 21:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wheelchair (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect Persistent anonymous insertion of external link spam and general vandalism. - Justin (Authalic) 20:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 20:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Departed (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect Persistent vandalism, especially after this just won the Best Picture Q. Lockins 20:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected temporarily due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 20:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sandwich (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect Persistent, frequent, sometimes subtle IP vandalism Tomgreeny 19:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 19:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dora the Explorer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect because of a long history of vandalism. This page has been vandalized about ten times in the past three days. Steve8675309 18:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 19:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Bonds (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect due to persistent vandalism. RJASE1 ^Talk 18:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Nishkid64 19:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Slater (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. Added tag, but didn't take (perhaps becuase admin has to add?)CPAScott 17:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Nishkid64 19:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giorgio Napolitano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect due to persistent vandalism. RJASE1 ^Talk 17:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to sudden spike in vandalism. Nishkid64 19:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Smithee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-Protection Being vandalized by many IPs. I am trying to revert but be the time I can, there is an edit conflict. -- Ryan ^{I'm Back!} 13:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discard Request Page was protected by admin and will be un-protected when conflict is resolved. -- Ryan ^{I'm Back!} 14:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Britney Spears (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protection Persistent edit-warring by registered users, frequently happening, users edit war rather than use talk page. --Valzigoi 12:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- tariqabjotu 12:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Hathaway (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protection Long-term edit war going on by users. --Valzigoi 12:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- tariqabjotu 12:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine Tate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protection Long term edit warring by users on a daily basis, refusal to discuss on talk page. --Valzigoi 12:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- tariqabjotu 12:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism, Over 50 counts of vandalism in the past week. Vox Rationis 12:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected -- tariqabjotu 12:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Karolina Kurkova (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protection There are WP:BLP issues here, and repeated, lengthy, protracted edit-warring going on, on a long-term, daily basis by registered users. Semi-protection will not stop them from edit-warring. --Valzigoi 12:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- tariqabjotu 12:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

House (TV series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protection Long term edit war by users and also by members of WikiProject Television. The edit war has been going on for ages. --Valzigoi 12:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- tariqabjotu 12:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toyota Corolla (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protection Edit warring by users, continual edit-warring, on a daily basis. --Tonysqwie 12:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- tariqabjotu 12:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hard disk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Persistent, random vandalism every time this page is unprotected. Chris Cunningham 10:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected -- tariqabjotu 12:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User: Hdt83 (edit | [[Talk:User: Hdt83|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect, please: recently vandalized by an Anonymous Coward at 75.20.202.255

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 10:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific Revolution (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. For 15 days, since February 10, 2007, this article has been subjected to non-stop vandalization, not even reverted in all that time. logologist|Talk 08:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 08:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With all respect, how much vandalization is required? logologist|Talk 08:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lasting longer than 10 minutes for a start, and by different users. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 09:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wanderlei Silva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. High levels of IP vandalism and vandalism by new users have been occuring to this page over the past day. east.718 07:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 08:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pussy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Pussy (and Duck) has been an endlessly wearisome target of vandals, and this has been semiprotected. But at 03:57 on 25 February 2007 User:Royalguard11 unprotected it, and (as should have been expected) the vandalism restarted 14 minutes later. Please re-semiprotect Pussy, and keep it semiprotected. Much experience has shown that these vandals do not go away and stay away like an ignored wasp. Anthony Appleyard 07:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 08:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pete Sampras (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[1] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by User:Lman1987 and almost assuredly his anonymous IP accounts (including User:72.155.113.55 and User:66.4.209.194) and impersonation accounts (including User:Tennis Xspert and User:Tennis Xpert). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[2] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andre Agassi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[3] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by User:Lman1987 and almost assuredly his anonymous IP accounts (including User:72.155.113.55 and User:66.4.209.194) and impersonation accounts (including User:Tennis Xspert and User:Tennis Xpert). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[4] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marat Safin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[5] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by User:Lman1987 and almost assuredly his anonymous IP accounts (including User:72.155.113.55, User:70.153.126.51, and User:66.4.209.194) and impersonation accounts (including User:Tennis Xpert). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[6] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rafael Nadal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[7] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by User:Lman1987 and almost assuredly his anonymous IP accounts (including User:72.155.113.55, User:70.153.126.51, and User:66.4.209.194) and impersonation accounts (including User:Tennis Xspert and User:Tennis Xpert). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[8] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lleyton Hewitt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[9] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by User:Lman1987 and almost assuredly his anonymous IP accounts (including User:72.155.113.55, User:70.153.126.51, and User:66.4.209.194) and impersonation accounts (including User:Tennis Xpert). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[10] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bjorn Borg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[11] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by User:Lman1987 and almost assuredly his anonymous IP accounts (including User:72.155.113.55 and User:68.155.24.197) and impersonation accounts (including User:Tennis Xpert). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[12] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Roddick (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[13] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by User:Lman1987 and almost assuredly his anonymous IP accounts (including User:72.155.113.55 and User:66.4.209.194) and impersonation accounts (including User:Tennis Xpert). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[14] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John McEnroe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[15] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by (almost assuredly) the anonymous IP accounts of User:Lman1987 (including User:72.155.113.55) and impersonation accounts (including User:Tennis Xpert). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[16] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marcos Baghdatis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[17] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by (almost assuredly) the anonymous IP accounts of User:Lman1987 (including User:72.155.113.55 and User:66.4.209.194). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[18] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Carlos Ferrero (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. Per the instructions posted on User:Majorly's talk page,[19] I am again asking for semi-protection of this article. This article is one of the targets of repeated vandalism, disruption, and edits against community consensus by User:Lman1987 and almost assuredly his anonymous IP accounts (including User:72.155.113.55). The original request for semi-protection, the denial of that request, and the subsequent request for reconsideration can be found here:[20] Thank you! Tennis expert 07:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The users and IPs has been blocked from editing. If they come back after the block, please contact me. Nishkid64 19:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

11:11 (numerology) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect Please protect against edits from ip addresses. Anonymous editors continue to add unsourced, poorly written material, disregarding Wikipedia's content policies. I'm hoping that semi-protection will prevent a number of reverts and that this might help persuade them to read the content policies and discuss them on the talk page. TheRingess (talk) 05:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 08:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Harper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect, Prime Minister of Canada, protection expired couple of days ago and vandalism has flared up. RJASE1 ^Talk 05:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 07:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox City (edit | [[Talk:template:Infobox City|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

full-protect due to persistent vandalism which undermines the process of Categories for deletion. (Dissucion occured at WP:AIV. Major issue: The removal auto-generated sub-categories of Category:Cities in the UTC timezone is prejudicial to the CfD of Category:Cities in the UTC-5 timezone. Please revert and place full protection with explanation. --CyclePat 03:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What CyclePat is mistakenly and offensively calling vandalism, is a reversion of edits that he made which break the template. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Is this vandalism? for more discussion. The notice on AIV has been removed by another admin. older ≠ wiser 03:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For above reason. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 07:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kylie Minogue (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect due to persistent vandalism by multiple anons and new users. RJASE1 ^Talk 03:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 07:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vancouver, Washington (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semiprotect. Repeated IP vandalism of large amounts of text VanTucky 02:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ~ Arjun 04:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Introduction (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protect alot of IP vandilism over the last 24 hr i suggest a 1 week protect. Cocoaguy ここがいい _contribs^talkTodays Pick 02:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined the page is meant to be edited, just watchlist and revert any vandalism. ~ Arjun 04:22, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutepunk.net (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-Protect - Lots of IP edits today and I'm not sure where vandalism started. Corpx 02:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ~ Arjun 04:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Academy Award (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), 79th Academy Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), 79th Academy Awards nominees and winners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-Protection With the ceremonies ongoing, all 3 pages are undergoing heavy vandalism, especially the Noms & winners page. -- Scorpion 02:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined look down the page a little and you will see some more info. ~ Arjun 04:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL (Internet slang) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

'Semi-protection. 7 vandalistic edits in the past 24 hours. bibliomaniac15 02:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ~ Arjun 04:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jessica Simpson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect due to persistent vandalism. RJASE1 ^Talk 02:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ~ Arjun 04:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

March Days (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full protection - To discuss further changes and stop the warring. Artaxiad 01:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite yet. I've got the page on my watchlist and will try to serve as a temporary mediator between the two parties, seeing as Srose (the former mediator) is away. If the edit warring gets worse, I'll protect again, but I hope that you and the other several will be able to work things out. Anyways, last time the page was protected, nothing was accomplished on the talk page. If other admins feel I'm too involved to make decisions about protection, please notify me and I'll step aside. Picaroon 01:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, but make sure Atabek doesn't revert to the POV version. Artaxiad 02:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined o.k seems to be under control then. ~ Arjun 04:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Love (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect page - lots of anon. vandalism recently. SparrowsWing _(talk) 01:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I wish to second this request, though it is often a targt of vandalism, it is still nonetheless a target and vandals need to be defered. Willie Stark ^{"Believe in Me!"} 01:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected very heavy vandalism. ~ Arjun 04:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy Noah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Full Protection Just for a short while (48-72 hours) until the fallout from the "Evicted From Wikipedia" article dies down. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 17:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. For now, be sure to use descriptive edit summaries and discuss edits on talk. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 08:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cao Wei (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Eastern Wu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Shu Han (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The articles are currently object of an editor's incessant desire to mix fact and fiction when it came to important historical personalities. (At least, that's my view of it.) As I am an active editor on all three articles and am involved in reverting this user (Teniii (talk · contribs)), I do not feel comfortable protecting, so I am requesting another admin review the situation and protect them. --Nlu (talk) 16:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although I feel this is a bit premature, Fully protected due to revert warring.Cbrown1023 talk 16:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Full protection - Indefblocked sockpuppet messing with sockpuppet tags. —Dgies^t c 09:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Created page with false tag, but has done nothing since. Nishkid64 19:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Full protection - Indefblocked sockpuppet messing with sockpuppet tags. —Dgies^t c 09:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Created the page with a false tag, but has done nothing since. Nishkid64 19:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Julian_Moti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. Consistent unsourced NPOV overwriting attempts to clean up and Wiki-fy article. Attempts to moderate with Vandal have failed, and from user page it's not the first time. Xlh 06:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection is not going to end your dispute, nor will it affect it. alphachimp 04:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lesbian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect IP vandalised very regularily. User:thuglas|thuglas]]^T|C 00:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. alphachimp 04:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect IP vandalised regularily thuglas^T|C 00:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time. Just watchlist and revert any vandalism. alphachimp 04:37, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Claudette Colbert (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

full-protect because some strange users vandalized this article for several months. It is not possible to discuss it. The quality of the article decreased remarkably. The administrator should edit the article for such a case. --Nrh15 05:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a reason to fully protect it. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 08:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Black People (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect Semi-protection was just lifted, and IP vandals reappeared almost immediately, with racist vandalism. Jd2718 18:32, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to heavy vandalism. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 19:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.

• To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
• Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
• Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
• If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.

Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

Sandy_Berger (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Please unprotect, or at least alter to semi-protection. Despite the un-logged in user's avoidance of using the talk page for dispute resolution, the issue causing the minor edit war had been largely resolved by the time the page was protected. I had reviewed his last change (a superflouous but innocuous cite) and decided to let it pass. I have no particular reason to touch the page other than to eventually add some information in another section. Anonymous Wikipedian 22:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Balhae (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Please unprotect. The article has been protected simply because of minor edit wars. Also, the admin who has protected the article has not moved to edit, remove, and change the article to make it NPOV. For example, under the external links section a "Koreans, this is wiki english. No korean craps, plz." is written on there. The protection has made it difficult to edit the article since edits have to be requested to the admin only. Good friend100 22:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reasonable issues that started the revert war do not yet seem to have been resolved. It is also too soon to assume that the editors have lost enough interest. Consider adding {{Editprotected}} to the page's talk page to request small modifications, or making a significant edit request on this page for large edits that are agreed upon. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 22:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Asian fetish (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Please unprotect. There are serious citation problems and NPOV problems. There are other Wikipedia articles, web forums, and opinions sections of online newspapers used as references. 144.81.32.187 19:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Un-protected. It's been protected for long enough. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 20:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:China-geo-stub (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Edit warrior has been page banned from editing the template. Revert war won't continue. Last edit before edit war was [21]. Please remove protection and restore version (I'm not touching it, I'm involved). SchmuckyTheCat 18:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Un-protected. It's been protected for long enough. Hopefully things have calmed down since then. Nishkid64 20:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected. High-risk template. Nishkid64 20:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Decascade. Page is cascade-protected and semi'd; doing this is a known privelige-escalation flaw, as any autoconfirmed user can full-protect a page by transcluding it onto a cascaded semi'd page. --ais523 18:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Un-protected. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 20:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Willa Holland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Unprotect. Prone to low levels of spamdalism (generally reverted pretty quickly by multiple users), protected today by User:Radiant! as "edit warring", do not believe it to be prone to enough spandalism to warrant full protection. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 15:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Un-protected. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 19:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unprotect. Talk page was getting hammered by User:Nkras socks, but new socks haven't been seen elsewhere in a few days. Unprotection is probably safe now. — coelacan talk — 06:44, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Un-protected. It's been protected for long enough. Hopefully things have calmed down since then. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 08:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jung Myung Seok (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Unprotect. The article page is currently protected. In its current state it violates the biography of living persons policy; certain sentences purport conjecture as fact. The on-going dispute has been between those who edit the article of these conjectures and those who write them. Case in point, the very first paragraph: "...is believed to be in Costa Rica." The author could have just as easily said Siberia, New Orleans, or Timbuktu because they all would have made equal sense when the sentence is published without support/citation.

This habit of conjecture continues throughout the article. Because little public information is known about the person in question it is easy for authors to add conjecture and site their own personal websites as support. It may appear as an edit war, but that would be a mis-representation of what is taking place. Please read through the talk page history for context.

Persist and glaring violations of wikipedia policy on this protected page is an error that should be immediately corrected given that article in question is a biography of a living person. An effort to curb such violations by including the policy at the top of the talk page has had no effect. Outside editors are welcomed.

Uptional 14:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with unprotection. I want to remove the reference to sonsangnim, as this is passim in Korean. It's like calling the leader of your company "boss" - it has no special meaning.

Also, he's not really a "former Unificationist". --Uncle Ed 18:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Un-protected. It's been protected for long enough. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 20:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unprotect. Several weeks have passed since the Super Bowl and the page had been protected that night to douse a revert war over whether he was being booed or the fans were shouting Moose. The Protect did it's job and now nobody seems to care.--Sand Squid 14:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Un-protected. It's been protected for long enough. Hopefully things have calmed down since then. Nishkid64 19:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.

• Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
• Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{Edit COI}} template should be used.
• Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
• If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
• This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.

Neopets (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• There are currently messages embedded in the text 3 times that ask users to email their usernames and passwords to a hotmail account designed to look like an official email address belonging to the site monitors. This kind of scam is dangerous to have posted in the Wiki for a site that is used worldwide, but cannot be erased from the text due to the protection in place on the article. It would be great if someone could look into this. Thanks!

Fizzbee 07:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd care to explain further, that would be great. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 10:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a normal user already took care of the problem. The page is just semi-protected. -FunnyMan 01:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:Lts (edit | template | history | links | watch | logs)

• Basically there's a double use of another template, which should only appear in the Doc page. I've explained what to do on the talk. If you're not a template guru, the simplest thing would be to copy and paste the Meta version in. Thanks // FrankB 10:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done If that's not worked, see my response on the talk page. --Robdurbar 13:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The weather in London

• Were The weather in London not a metasyntactic variable in Wikipedia help (see Wikipedia:Protected titles/Deliberate redlinks), it would more than likely be a redirect to Climate of London. But because the talk page itself is protected, I cannot perform my SOP of using {{editprotected}} to bring up this issue on a talk page. Please unprotect the talk page or add content to the talk page to the following effect:

--Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 15:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Robdurbar 16:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Schwarz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• This is an attack page being run by a group of people who don't like her. I think it should be unprotected so that it can be nominated for deletion. Steve Dufour 12:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Already unprotected., as far as I can tell. Daniel.Bryant 09:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected Still protected. -- Avi 18:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Istanbul (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Istanbul is in a terrible shape and I have the resources and skills to improve it. Regards. DragutBarbarossa 18:14, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Propose your changes at the article's talk page, and obtain consensus with other editors before doing {{editprotected}}. Nishkid64 01:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Ryun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• This page is protected apparently because of his status as an ex-member of US Congress and my status as a noob. He is also one of the greatest track & field milers of all time and the discussion of his athletic career needs a major update. I have proposed some changes on the Talk page and would like to expand on this further, but am awaiting permission prior to doing a full write up.Fizbin 20:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Un-protected. It's been protected for long enough. Hopefully things have calmed down since then. Nishkid64 00:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Matrix scheme

• There has been a minor edit war due to a disagreement over external links. It was brought to our attention that the external links failed to meet several of Wikipedia rules, and upon further investigation this was proved to be true. The links were for matrixwatch.org and cyberama.info. Both external links fail on similar points of the Verifibility and Advertising sections of the External Link rules. We have tried to discuss this rationally on the Talk page, but instead of having a rational discussion it has degraded to character assassination.

I ask that ALL external links be deleted due to them both failing the criteria needed. --Cybertrax (talk 04:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Discuss on the talk page, it was only locked today. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 22:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I ask again that ALL external links be deleted due to them both failing the criteria needed. We have spent several days trying to discuss this issue on the Talk page, but both main parties agree that the discussion is going nowhere. I quote the External Link policy, whereby a discussion forum is not allowed to be used as an external link.

--Cybertrax (talk 00:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Truth About Peanut Butter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The page is protected from re-creation. I wrote a decent article on the subject, located at this subpage - User:Flvg94/The_Truth_About_Peanut_Butter. Please substitute the current blank page with my article, and if protection is still needed against vandals, lock the article from further edits. -Flvg94 17:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined A total of zero sources, and looks barely notable anyway. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 22:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, In the episode, the main character of American Dad! is seen writing a Wikipedia article on "The Truth About Peanut Butter". A number of people have duplicated his efforts in real life, and this is not a notable subject at all. Nishkid64 22:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering if the this is not notable attitude is somewhat related with wikipedia being described as a place where you can make any outrageous claim you want with absolutely no proof and millions of people would accept it as fact in this American Dad! episode. Locking the page is just showing the world how closed minded wikipedians are, would be way better to replace the lock with a redirection to Wikipedia:Wikipedia_on_TV_and_radio#2007 or Black_Mystery_Month#Cultural_references which mentions this.

Academy Award (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), 79th Academy Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), 79th Academy Awards nominees and winners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect both pages: As of this request, the ceremony is just beginning. Vandals and IPs will be adding incorrect info, ugly protests and the like (so was the case with this year's Grammys). --Slgrandson (page - messages - contribs) 01:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like there's some vandalism starting already, but also some well-meaning edits by one anonymous user. Looks like the situation's under control to me, there's one major vandal who just got *eir last warning. -FunnyMan 01:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And *e has been blocked. There's also a vandal-fighter among the anonymous users. Until and unless we see a bunch of (unique) anonymous vandals, I think it should just stay unprotected. -FunnyMan 01:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined I just recently blocked an editor vandalizing 79th Academy Awards, and it appears as though things have calmed down since then. If it flares up again, it could be semi-protected (I'm watching it now). As for the other two, I believe those articles are okay. -- tariqabjotu 02:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Bonds (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect due to persistent vandalism. RJASE1 ^Talk 00:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined There is some vandalism, but not enough to justify protection at this time. Request again if vandalism increases from multiple unregistered users.--Húsönd 01:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jerry Rice (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect - Several apparent sock-puppet IPs making the same blatant vandalous edits over and over. Neier 00:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ~ Arjun 00:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hentai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect, due to vandalism in the form of nonsense edits and page blanking by IP addresses. Limiting the page to being edited by registered users would put the clamps on this. Thank you. Jaguara 22:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected -- tariqabjotu 23:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Jaguara 01:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

George W. Bush (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Unprotection requested, article has been protected for too long now. --sunstar net^talk 00:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I recall correctly, it gets hit by a wave of vandalism any time it gets unprotected. Hbdragon88 01:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. Unprotection never works on that article. – Steel 01:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Emo (slang) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect - There is always frequent, profane, and blatant vandalism on this page after it is unprotected (and even some from user accounts while it is semiprotected, but we'll have to live with that). This page should be semiprotected with a very long or indefinate expiry time. Thanks. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 00:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined eh' it has just been unprotected...today 0_o so I think that it should be given some time, obviously it has increased after the unprotect. Another admin can overturn this though if it gets a lot worse. But for now lets try unprotection. ~ Arjun 00:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Dickens (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect Varied and persistent IP vandalism. I'm guessing lots of high schoolers find the page via Google. Xiner (talk, email) 23:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected ~ Arjun 00:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect Lots of IP vandalism by what one can assume is girls who have the name Sarah and want to write about themselves, or kids who dislike someone named Sarah and decided to express it in the form of less than complimentary descriptions of them. Either way, completely unrelated to the article's subject, and most of the recent edits have been reverting vandalism or the vandalism itself. Irish♣Pearl 23:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ~ Arjun 00:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool (aesthetic) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect IP vandalism. [22] [23] futurebird 23:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- tariqabjotu 23:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cranky Kong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. This dumb edit war has flared up once again, and no one has caught it and done something about it until now. Typically I'd ask for a full protect, but it seems that the main offenders at the moment are IP addresses. In any case, I can't understand why it is so difficult for some people to say "such-and-such fact is disputed" and leave it at that. Syckls 21:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- tariqabjotu 23:40, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anne Frank (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect, once protected, too early unprotected, still "clever" anons vandalize ... :( ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 21:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected -- tariqabjotu 23:39, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Darvon cocktail (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect. While this page hasn't received a particularly large amount of vandalism, in this case I think that semi is justified. There has been repeated insertion of specific information about how to prepare or find out more about this suicide cocktail by anon IPs and new users, against consensus. Wikipedia is not a recipe book, and this is a particularly dangerous recipe to be hosting. Mostlyharmless 19:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected Done, and I'm going to delete that revision. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stereotypes of East and Southeast Asians (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect Heavy IP vandilism over the last 2 days. Cocoaguy ここがいい _contribs^talkTodays Pick 19:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stone Cold Steve Austin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protect due to persistent vandalism. RJASE1 ^Talk 19:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Australian Regiment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-Protect IP vandilism war with Personal Attack. Cocoaguy ここがいい _contribs^talkTodays Pick 17:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The user has been blocked from editing. Nishkid64 18:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]