Wookieepedia:Requests for protection archive

This is the archive for Wookieepedia:Requests for protection. Comments and topics here are no longer live.

Requests for protection

2020-12-08

  1. Dark trooper to be protected, as people have added The Mandalorian to it quite a few times at this point. JediMasterMacaroniAdmiral Ackbar RH(Conversation) 18:31, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Added sprot, that should prevent most of the edits. Tommy-Macaroni 18:53, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

2020-12-19

  1. The Mandalorian Season Three, as it has been vandalized numerous times, with edit wars between Dec. 24, and 25. It should be 24, as it is a Friday. Harpsicorder (talk) 16:49, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Protected. For the record, if Disney have said it'll be released on the 25th, that's what we need to be going with, regardless of what day of the week that is. Tommy-Macaroni 13:45, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

2020-11-02

#Wookieepedia I am requesting Wookieepedia be protected from IP edits because on this wiki, IPs have been known to vandalize the wiki. Any users may edit, just not IPs. SCVSlalom (talk) 17:49, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

  • Yeah that's not happening. We're not going to completely ban all IPs just because some of them vandalise the site. Many IPs are extremely valuable contributors, and indeed many regular users are vandals. If we did as you suggest, vandals would simply create an account to edit from, thus achieving nothing. Tommy-Macaroni 18:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

06/12/2020

  1. I request that the Legends Sebulba article be semi-protected due to continuous vandalism by one user who keeps vandalizing it because of his preference to Star Trek. CIS roundel Erebus Chronus Open frequency 20:58, June 12, 2020 (UTC)
    • Efforts are being made to remove said user's presence via range blocks and abuse filters, but the page has also been protected. Tommy-Macaroni 21:12, June 12, 2020 (UTC)

01/30/2020

  1. Dio—A number of unregistered users have vandalized the page recently, so much that the entire recent revision history for that page is practically reversions. Zed42 (talk) 08:13, January 30, 2020 (UTC)
    • Thanks for bringing this to our attention, the article has now been protected.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 22:26, January 30, 2020 (UTC)

01/27/2020

  1. Darth Plagueis—There have been multiple cases of various unregistered users vandalising the page. Thanks in advance! - - -CIS roundel OOM 224 ༼༽{talk}༼༽ 14:07, January 27, 2020 (UTC)
    • I have semi-protected the article. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Tommy Imperial Emblem Macaroni 17:31, January 27, 2020 (UTC)

11/14/2019

  • Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order—users have been posting leaks in the appearances of the game. Despite launching tomorrow, I recommend that a level of protection for a brief period of time is in order until when the game launches.--Vitus InfinitusTalk 14:29, November 14, 2019 (UTC)
    • I'm to understand physical copies of the game are available in the US tonight starting at 9 PM, so I've set semi-protection for that time. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 14:40, November 14, 2019 (UTC)

06/30/2018

  1. Pong Krell: At least three IPs vandalizing the Pong Krell page, and keep reverting corrections.
    • I actually only count two IPs, and those were both from the same person, apparently. That person was blocked, and the incident seems to have stopped over 24 hours ago. In the event it starts again, the offender will be blocked again for a longer period of time. I don't see a need to protect the page at this time. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 19:36, June 30, 2018 (UTC)
      • If you take a closer look at the edit history of Pong Krell you will see a third IP which appears to be the same as those previous two IPs. --OOM-89 (talk) 00:41, July 1, 2018 (UTC)
        • The IPs are all banned as part of a wider rangeblock on the IP range, so we shouldn't be seeing them for a while now. Page protection is generally reserved for instances of persistent vandalism from several different users, not a single repeat offender. 1358 (Talk) 00:47, July 1, 2018 (UTC)

04/09/2018

  1. Shriv Suurgav and 61st Mobile Infantry both pages have been edited with unverified information by several users as it can be seen on the edit history. All users have been warned about it, but they keep ignoring the warning. The pages were protected temporarily and the protection ended on April 5, I'm asking to semi-protect them again for a few weeks again.---DarthRuiz30 (talk) 22:00, April 9, 2018 (UTC)
    • In the time since the previous protection ended on April 5, it seems there has really only been one anon who has been perpetrating this disruption, which immediately should have been brought to the attention of an administrator. Blocking is more effective than protecting pages and doesn't penalize innocent users from having editing access to a given page. I have now blocked that anon rather than reinstating protection here, so we'll see how it goes. In the future, please bring instances of edit warring, vandalism, unverified information, and the like to an administrator's talk page, IRC, and/or Vandalism in progress. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 15:53, April 10, 2018 (UTC)

03/06/2018

  1. CT-7567 Since the release of the last episode the page has become a high traffic page, and because of that several users keep adding unconfirmed information even when they're warned. A temporal protection would be good--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 05:15, March 7, 2018 (UTC)

1/25/2018

  1. Armitage Hux Vandalising and editing war by IP accounts Since the movie came out the page has been repeatedly vandalized by IP accounts. I think temporary semi-protection is in order. Abidos (talk) 11:31, January 25, 2018 (UTC)

April 25, 2017

  1. Eleodie Maracavanya - People keep removing information explain the character's [Redacted by administration] status without consulting Aftermath: Life Debt and Aftermath: Empire's End. Have to keep reverting edits. Andykatib 03:34, April 25, 2017 (UTC)

May 24, 2016

  1. Mission to the Naboo mountains Heeeey guys, can you put a lock on this? It's a status article that's getting hit by an anon who thinks he knows best. Thanks. Corellian PremierJedi symbolThe Force will be with you always 14:05, May 24, 2016 (UTC)
  1. Infinities: Given the brand is defunct the article should be protected from anti-canon trolls like User:50.148.164.233. --Alientraveller (talk) 10:25, February 12, 2016 (UTC)
    • The page was not edited for a year until the vandal appeared, further demonstrating it is unnecessary for IPs to edit. --Alientraveller (talk) 10:25, February 12, 2016 (UTC)
      • Considering it's so far just one vandal who has edited in, like you say, over a year, it's better practice to block the vandal (which I've done) instead of protecting the entire page. In future instances, it's better to report the individual vandal on WP:VIP and only request protection if it's targeted by multiple people. Cheers, 1358 (Talk) 11:54, February 12, 2016 (UTC)

May 17, 2015

  1. Home One 11 times over the past month an anonymous proxy has removed/tried to remove masses of text from the page replacing it with something along the lines of "Motherfucking hacker". Trip391 (talk) 15:52, May 17, 2015 (UTC)
    Cade semi-protected the page for a week, and I range-blocked the guy for three months to keep him from moving to other pages. —MJ— Jedi Council Chambers 17:20, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

4th Jan 2015

  1. Template:Rebels episodes It is currently unprotected but has the semi-protected tag. With new episodes being released and the risk of vandalism, I propose it be either semi or super-semi protected. Manoof (talk) 03:16, January 4, 2015 (UTC)
    Semi-protected by Cade. —MJ— Council Chambers 04:33, January 4, 2015 (UTC)

2/1/2013

  1. Kalani (super tactical droid) anon vandalism. DarthRevan1173 Revan Headshot (Long live Lord Revan) 00:03, February 2, 2013 (UTC)
    • Eh, I don't see a need to protect at this time. The vandalism was coming from a single anon who has since stopped. If he resumes under the same IP address, blocking would be better; protection can be applied if other vandals show up or if this one starts hopping from one address to another. —MJ— Council Chambers 02:14, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

1/31/2013

  1. user: Chrisstansfield user reverted inactive tag on their userpage without making any mainspace edits. Supreme Emperor (talk) 03:57, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

August 19

  1. Pre Vizsla - Indefinite full protection several anon users keep vandalizing the page. DarthRevan1173 (Long live Lord Revan) 05:16, August 19, 2012 (UTC)
    • The vandalism appears to be originating from a single person across two IPs, or possibly two friends in close proximity of one another. Since both IPs have been blocked, I'm going to hold off from protecting for now. If this continues, find me or another admin and we can protect. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 05:32, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

August 10

  1. List of books - Indefinite full protection anon user keeps vandalizing the page. DarthRevan1173 (talk) 19:32, August 10, 2012 (UTC)
    • Going to start by giving it a month and see if he goes away. If it comes back, I'll protect it from anons permanently. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 19:51, August 10, 2012 (UTC)

July 15, 2012

  1. User:Arashi-senpai - Indefinite full protection. User reverted {{Inactive}} back in April but has edited only his userpage since then without editing the main namespace. —MJ— Jedi Council Chambers Sunday, July 15, 2012, 19:34 UTC
    • Resolved by Culator. CC7567 (talk) 01:56, July 16, 2012 (UTC)

April 30, 2012

  1. User:Starwarsrulez - Indefinite full protection. User has reverted {{Inactive}} twice without actually contributing. —MJ— Comlink Monday, April 30, 2012, 03:34 UTC
    • Resolved by Culator. CC7567 (talk) 01:56, July 16, 2012 (UTC)

March 20, 2012

  1. Jaina Solo - Full move protection. She marries Jag at the end of Apocalypse, but we have no evidence of what her new name is or if she even changed her name at all. It's already been moved twice, once to Jaina Fel and once to Jaina Solo Fel, and we have no canonical evidence to support either of those. Best to lock it down until we get confirmation as to what her name is now. —MJ— Comlink Tuesday, March 20, 2012, 21:21 UTC

March 18th, 2012

  1. N'Kata Del Gormo - Has been, and still is, a subject of persistent vandalism and additions of unsourced info/fanon. nayayen★talk 22:17, March 18, 2012 (UTC)
    • You're right; this page has never seen an end of bad edits. I've given it an indefinite sprot. jSarek 02:45, March 19, 2012 (UTC)

March 14th, 2012

  1. Methane Wastes - This has been re-created and subsequently left unverified several times now. I'd like to request that it be protected from re-creation. --Jinzler 17:27, March 14, 2012 (UTC)

January 17, 2012

  1. Rugess Nome/Darth Tenebrous (whichever one the article is at when someone gets to this) – Move protection. Been moved between these two titles three times in the past five days by three different users, and apparently no one can agree on how the naming policy applies here. Best to shut down the move war before it can proceed further. —MJ— Jedi Council Chambers Tuesday, January 17, 2012, 01:08 UTC
    • Haven't ever heard of a "move war" before (:P), but locked from moving. CC7567 (talk) 18:47, January 19, 2012 (UTC)

January 10, 2012

  1. Your mom – Create-protection. Been deleted three times and will most likely never be the title of a valid article. Master Jonathan Holocomm Tuesday, January 10, 2012, 21:51 UTC

November 17, 2011

  1. Third Battle of Mirgoshir — Anons keep recreating this page and not citing any sources. --Jinzler 18:06, November 17, 2011 (UTC)
    • I don't think it's possible to protect the page from being recreated while it exists. A protection applied now would disappear when the page is deleted. If it's deleted once again, I'll try to remember to protect it from being created. Cheers, 1358 (Talk) 18:47, November 17, 2011 (UTC)

September 21, 2011

  1. Consular-class cruiser (Charger c70 retrofit) — Various anon IPs removing sourced information from the infobox, despite several users checking and confirming the content is correct. JangFett (Talk) 15:15, September 21, 2011 (UTC)
    • Two-week cooldown for anons and new users. It might be worth quoting the relevant section on the talk page, since the anon(s) in question seem to be stubborn but acting in good faith. jSarek 20:28, September 21, 2011 (UTC)

July 1, 2011

  1. Lando Calrissian — An article that has been attracting anonymous vandals over its history. Most registered edits are reverts.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 17:13, July 1, 2011 (UTC)
    • Sprotected indefinitely. CC7567 (talk) 21:36, July 1, 2011 (UTC)

June 29, 2011

  1. Talk:Breast — A pointless debate is raging across the page—a topic which had been settled two times on the same page. A temporary full protection would be appropriate and a permanent semi-protection could also be desired.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 11:24, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
    • Gave it a lockdown for a day. Hopefully that will cool things down. -- Riffsyphon1024 12:20, June 29, 2011 (UTC)

May 24, 2011

  1. Star Wars — Excessive vandalism by mainly anons and a few newly registered users to the extent that most of the edits made by established users in this year are reverts. I consider this article an appropriate candidate for semi-protection.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 17:51, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure this article necessarily requires protection on these grounds just yet. It's important to distinguish true vandalism from general stupidity. Going through some of the recent edits over the past two months or so, I would classify very few of the reversions as genuine vandalism and more just well-meaning people adding dumb crap. If this article does experience a real spike in vandalism, protection is always there as an option for us, but I'm not seeing it yet. Keep patrolling. Toprawa and Ralltiir 18:59, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
      • Right, okay.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 19:21, May 24, 2011 (UTC)
      • Grunny has just protected it until November 27, 2011.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 12:59, May 27, 2011 (UTC)
        • Sorry, Tope. Didn't notice this request and your response when I protected it, if anyone disagrees with the protection, let me know and we can look at it again :). Grunny (talk) 13:17, May 27, 2011 (UTC)

May 14, 2011

  1. Quarsh Panaka, counter-productive edit-warring. Trak Nar Ramble on 06:14, May 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • Sproted for a fortnight. jSarek 07:54, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

May 11, 2011

  1. Defender-class light corvette, Thranta-class Republic Corvette, Republic Capitol Ship and Sith battlecruiser - Constant fanon from the same IP range. -- I need a name (Complain here) 18:20, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

May 2, 2011

  1. Jedi Code — Persistent adding of OOU/OR/speculative interpretations by anons to the extent that most of the recent (read: since 2008) edits by registered users are reversions. NAYAYEN 10:00, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Eclipse-class dreadnought — This article had been attracting quite a lot of fanon edits from anonymous contributors and new users during its history—including the recent period of time—, so I think that a semi-protection would be appropriate.—TK-999 Era-imp(Rise of the Empire) 20:21, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

April 13, 2011

  1. Rodia — A semi-protect for this one. It's been seeing some counter-productive edit-warring this evening. Trak Nar Ramble on 08:40, April 13, 2011 (UTC)
    • Vandalizing user already blocked, but article semi-protected for two weeks. CC7567 (talk) 19:03, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

March 24, 2011

  1. Wookieepedia:Wookieepedians — This probably should be fully create-protected, as it's likely that someone will try to recreate it since there are thousands upon thousands of redlinks to this page out there from welcome messages. Whatever admin takes care of this, please also note that the Wikia welcome tool is still adding these redlinks via MediaWiki:Welcome-message-user, so that redlink should be removed (and also the ones on MediaWiki:Welcome-message-anon and MediaWiki:Welcome-user-page, even though the tool isn't configured to use those). Master Jonathan (Council Chambers) Thursday, March 24, 2011, 02:39 UTC

March 02, 2011

  1. Sexes — Take a peek at the History. It's a vandalism magnet. Trak Nar Ramble on 08:53, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
    • Got it. I would have protected it earlier, but thanks for the heads up, Trak. -- Riffsyphon1024 08:54, March 2, 2011 (UTC)

February 8, 2011

  1. Confederacy of Independent Systems has been attracting a lot of anons adding unverified info. The edit history speaks for itself. NAYAYEN—it appears to be a frammistat 11:07, February 8, 2011 (UTC)

January 25, 2011

  1. Force Lightning has been vandalised many, many times over the last month, both by unregistered users and newly registered users. It seems unlikely that those users actually trying to improve the article would be troubled by a semi-protection which would help to stop these attempts to sneak "mmmmmmmmmaaaaaaaaxxxxxxx" into the article. Holocron Greatholocron (Complain) 13:48, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
    • When crap edits start outnumbering legitimate edits, it's sprot time. Toprawa and Ralltiir 21:27, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

January 15, 2011

  1. Forum:Index should have the same semi-protection the index pages for the individual forums have, to prevent spam (like the edit I just removed.) —Silly Dan (talk) 13:15, January 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • Actually, I can't think of any reason it can't be fully protected. So now it is. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 16:01, January 15, 2011 (UTC)
  2. Alderaan - A repeat offender with a series of different IP addresses has returned to add nonsense to the terrain section, so I'd like to nip this in the bud. -- I need a name (Complain here) 22:40, January 15, 2011 (UTC)
    • Semi-protected indefinitely. CC7567 (talk) 23:04, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

December 14, 2010

  1. Talk:Battle of Hoth - I don't know why, but this talk page has been the target of random spam within the last few days. 1358 (Talk) 14:31, December 14, 2010 (UTC)
    • Did this on 12/14 but forgot to note it. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 16:03, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

October 24, 2010

  1. Wookieepedia:Things to do - A handy target for occasional vandalism (as has been the case) and doesn't really need to be edited by anyone other than admins. NAYAYEN 19:51, October 24, 2010 (UTC)

September 24, 2010

  1. I have added content to Ima-Gun Di's page, but the content has been repeatedly deleted several times by User:Ifindyourlackoffaithdisturbing. I would like it if you would administer a temporary protection on Ima-Gun Di's page. Commander CC4554 Republic Emblem (GAR Encrypted Database ) 04:04, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

September 18, 2010

  1. Colt—number of anons adding information of his death, which hasn't been confirmed. 1358 (Talk) 16:19, September 18, 2010 (UTC)

August 28, 2010

  1. Jedi Wizard, the victim of repeated vandalism. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 09:26, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

August 25, 2010

  1. Oola and Lyn Me - Too much crap from anons and newly registered users. -- I need a name (Complain here) 16:17, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
    • Oola protected, and SFH protected Lyn Me earlier. Grunny (talk) 21:38, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

August 13th, 2010

  1. I personally checked the "History" of the Jaden Korr article, and the article is getting semi-major revision after revision from unsigned users, plus an unsigned user had put Jaden's first blade color as Orange when it was by fact a Purple lightsaber blade, and it is quite annoying. So, I am requesting that the article, Jaden Korr, to have a permanent semi-protection lock on the article so that the problem will die down, if you know what I mean. Obi-Wan Kenobody Era-njo (Cone of Silence) 06:04, August 13, 2010 (UTC)
    • Looking at the history for the last 500 revisions, I don't see a need to protect this at the moment. It's not a huge or constant vandal target, just keep an eye on it if you think it's prone to false information, not restricting editing to a lot of potentially well meaning users. Grunny (talk) 06:09, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

July 24, 2010

  1. Unidentified Republic trooper (Battle of Alderaan) - repeated vandalism from multiple IPs. —Master Jonathan New Jedi Order (Jedi Council Chambers) 21:53, July 24, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Wookieepedia:Trash compactor/Anakin Skywalker's green lightsaber - Anti-sockpuppet protection; article being TCed was created by banned user Anakin skywalker resurrected. Darth Karikawill destroy your planet! 00:54, July 25, 2010 (UTC)
    • Sproted for great justice. jSarek 07:53, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

July 23, 2010

  1. File:DarthBaneLightsaber-CSWE.jpg - Anons repeatedly adding that this isn't Bane's lightsaber. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 22:25, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

July 21, 2010

  1. Star Wars: The Force Unleashed 2 - History of malicious or speculative edits, especially by unregistered contributors. Corellian PremierAll along the watchtower 11:48, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

July 15, 2010

  1. Kel Algwinn - History of fanon anons. -- I need a name (Complain here) 11:08, July 15, 2010 (UTC)
    • Done. Grunny 23:14, July 15, 2010 (UTC)

June 29, 2010

  1. User:TK-299 Nobody has yet vandalized my user page, but the chat in Senate Hall(Lock user page) says that I can ask to have it semi-protected. I am requesting this for my own piece of mind knowing that my user page won't be vandalized in the future. I hope I submitted this right. TK-299 (Click Here) Imperial Emblem 05:51, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

June 17, 2010

  1. Shae Vizla - users continually adding images/info about the Battle of Alderaan from the Hope cinematic trailer when there is no official confirmation it is her. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 18:42, June 17, 2010 (UTC)
  2. LEGO Star Wars III: The Clone Wars - A lot of anon IPs are adding in unverified information, and it's not stopping. Anything that is currently added into the app list is confirmed appearances. Anything else is unconfirmed/speculation. JangFett (Talk) 19:22, June 17, 2010 (UTC)

June 5, 2010

  1. Unidentified BX-series droid commando 2 (Cad Bane) (and probably this one by default will be next) is being constantly vandalized with redundant and bad quality edits by anons. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 17:55, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

May 9, 2010

  1. Pilf Mukmuk and Muk Muk monkey. Too many people keep adding information from Lethal Trackdown, without confirmation that its them. --Dr. Kermit(Complain.) 18:00, May 9, 2010 (UTC)
    • Fully protected for 2 weeks, just to give it time to die down. If it persists when that protection expires, just let one of us know. Chack Jadson (Talk) 20:10, May 9, 2010 (UTC)

May 2, 2010

  1. Wookieepedia:Privacy policy: I was shocked to find that this is completely unprotected. As a policy with potential legal ramifications, this needs to be full-protected. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 01:07, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

20 April 2010

  1. CC-6454: too many additions of unverified information surrounding his appearance in Death Trap and his death. CC7567 (talk) 00:42, April 20, 2010 (UTC)

6 April 2010

  1. Rumi Paramita: too many fanon additions surrounding her supposed death, which hasn't been confirmed. CC7567 (talk) 16:15, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

24 March 2010

  1. Greedo - Too many anons who can't get over Greedo firing a shot. -- I need a name (Complain here) 15:51, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

8 March 2010

  1. Cat and Mouse: high-traffic page, subject to a lot of attempts to add currently unverified info. CC7567 (talk) 19:08, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Onaconda Farr: same as above. CC7567 (talk) 19:08, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

4 February 2010

  1. Senate Murders: constant target of anons (and others) attempting to add as-yet unverified info. CC7567 (talk) 01:09, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
    • Semi-protected until the day after the episode airs. Grunny (Talk) 01:13, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

27 January 2010

  1. Wookieepedia:Featured article nominations: Seems to be no longer protected after restoration. I was able to move it, and as an anon, I could've also edited it if I wanted to. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 07:04, January 27, 2010 (UTC)
    • Restored previous protections. jSarek 07:13, January 27, 2010 (UTC)

26 January 2010

  1. Star Wars Battlefront: Elite Squadron - keeps on being edited with incorrect information by anonymous users. Ggctuk 19:47, January 26, 2010 (UTC)
    • I can't really see a strong history of vandalism there, and the page hasn't even been edited in two days. Grunny (Talk) 20:28, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

11 January 2010

  1. Wookieepedia:Trash compactor/Imperial capital ship (Byss) — TC thread for article originally written by banned user VT-16; requesting preemptive semi-protection to keep his sockpuppets off the page. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 17:53, January 11, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Wookieepedia:Trash compactor/Super Star Destroyer (Death Star) — same thing. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 18:00, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

10 January 2010

  1. Clone trooper captain - a magnet for people who insist of adding the fanon captain they've created. Requesting infinite semi-protection as in the case with Clone trooper commander. MauserComlink 20:31, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

5 January 2010

  1. Category:Wookieepedia featured articles: It doesn't need any actual regular editing but it is an odd magnet for vandalism. I don't know if you can protect a category though... Nayayen—TALK 15:04, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

3 January 2010

  1. Lightsaber Lost and The Mandalore Plot: as upcoming episodes, excessive unverified info wars. CC7567 (talk) 22:00, January 3, 2010 (UTC)

24 December, 2009

  1. CC-2224. History full of reverts. Constant vandalism/fanon target as a popular character. MauserComlink 20:02, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
  2. Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II. Again, full of reverts, especially speculation. Darth KarikaAnswering Machine 21:20, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

21 December, 2009

  1. Darth Maul. Excessive vandalism over month. MauserComlink 18:46, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
    • Chack caught it. Havac 19:20, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
  2. [1]. A Featured Article. Arthur232
    • The article shows no signs of recent or persistent vandalism. jSarek 20:45, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

07 December, 2009

  1. Plese protect Mission on Cato Neimoidia, people keep writing an article about it, though this isn't necessary. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 13:36, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
    • Protected for three months. Grunny (Talk) 20:12, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

11 November 2009

  1. Is there a time limit to how long pages are locked? I still haven't fully got the hang of this site. —Unsigned comment by 87.114.80.57 (talk • contribs)
    • Not a set time limit, no. Looking down this page, you can see that several different lengths of protection have been employed; it's also possible to lock a page indefinitely. Generally speaking, if you want to see a protected page unprotected, you should make a request in the section for it at the bottom of this page. I'd recommend registering and performing a few productive edits on unprotected articles first, though; anonymous contributors are generally the source of vandalism, and so are less likely to have a page that was protected as a result of vandalism in the first place unprotected for them. jSarek 22:09, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

27 September 2009

  1. CC-7567: As an important character of TCW, a lot of vandalism. I'd use semi-protection indefinite here, as it's very likely that these edits won't stop within the next time. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 16:26, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
    • Semi-protected. Havac 17:22, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

21 September 2009

  1. Children of the Force—upcoming episode, target for unverified info from anons. History basically says it all.
  2. Denal—aside from the episode part, same issue as above. CC7567 (talk) 16:34, September 21, 2009 (UTC)
    • Both taken care of: 1 month each. JorrelWiki-shrinkableFraajic 17:20, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

01 September 2009

  1. Stormtrooper sniper/Stormtrooper marksman - New user continually removing the redirect to Stormtrooper. - JMAS Hey, it's me! 18:26, September 1, 2009 (UTC)

31 July 2009

  1. CC-1119 - as always, just check the history. MauserComlink 19:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

18 July 2009

  1. Han Solo — As with so many requests on this page, the recent history speaks for itself. Being such a major character, this might be a good case for indefinite semi-protection like several other major characters. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 01:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Semi-protected indefinitely, constant vandal target. Grunny (Talk) 01:21, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

17 July 2009

  1. Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Republic Heroes: False referencing is being used by an anon, and none of the sources he/she provides verifies the claims. The guy either needs a block, or the page needs to be locked, but I'd thought I'd request the latter here. CC7567 (talk) 15:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

13 July 2009

Iridonian. Again, the recent History seems to speak for itself. People can't seem to understand what a misspelling is. Trak Nar Ramble on 03:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

12 July 2009

Darth Tenebrous. History speaks for itself. MauserComlink 07:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Protected like the taste of Miller Lite. Havac 07:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

2 June 2009

  1. Please protect all pages in my userspace as follows:

31 May 2009

  1. Aayla Secura: Currently being vandalized by several anons; see the page's history. CC7567 (talk) 21:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
    • Protected. Havac 21:24, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

24 May, 2009

  1. Brianna - Nubcakery. -- I need a name (Complain here) 20:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

21 May, 2009

  1. Visas Marr - Identical vandalism from various accounts. -- I need a name (Complain here) 22:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
    Semi-protected for a month. —Silly Dan (talk) 22:51, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

19 May 2009

  1. Mace Windu: Frequent vandalism target during the last few months, so I'd say semi-protect it from editing and full-protect from moving while being at it, because he'll likely don't need to be moved and he makes a good move-vandal target. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 11:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

7 May 2009

  1. user:Anju Vena Because I have had repeated unauthorized edits form various IP's I would say only semi protection is needed but thats just my thoughts.--Anju Vena KDY (Nihilus Speak) 17:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

24 April, 2009

  1. N'Kata Del Gormo—his history says it all. Master JonathanJedi Council Chambers 20:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

23 April, 2009

  1. Ewok - Vandalism from various IPs. -- I need a name (Complain here) 12:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

15 April, 2009

  1. Darth Vectivus fell a victim to an edit war. Please semi-protect the page and revert the last edit by the anon. Mauser 18:00, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
  2. Jedi has been vandalized by anons several times [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9] during the last month, so I'd propose to semi-protect the article in order to stop this vandalism. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 18:51, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

25 March, 2009

  1. I would request that both "Cargo of Doom" and The Clone Wars: Season Two be semi-protected against edits by new and anonymous users. They seem to be having speculative and unconfirmed information added fairly frequently. - JMAS Hey, it's me! 00:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
  2. I would request that "Holocron Heist" be semi-protected against anon and new users, for the same reasons as Cargo of Doom and The Clone Wars: Season Two. There has recently been some anon vandalism, as well. Lucius malfoy7 00:53, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
    • All of the above have been semi-protected until fall begins. jSarek 01:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

23 March, 2009

  1. I would propose to protect the article Jaster Mereel [move=sysop]. The page has recently been moved twice to vandalism titles, and if this page should ever need to be moved, it's always possible to ask an admin. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 15:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

17 February, 2009

  1. Jaina Solo: Per recent anon vandalism to the article. DC 23:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
    I don't think it's needed for now: only two anonymous edits in the past month, and only one was vandalism. —Silly Dan (talk) 23:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

16 February, 2009

  1. Ridge—I have provided a canonical source for Ridge's death on Teth, as well as specific details in my edit summaries, yet anons keep "making" him survive. Request semi-protection. Master JonathanJedi Council Chambers 02:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Protected for three months. jSarek 06:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

11 February, 2009

  1. The Clone Wars: Season Two This article hasn't really been attacked by unsourced information yet, but I have a feeling it will be soon, especially with so many sources out there already "posting" what the Season Two episodes will be. --CC7567 20:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Eh, there's no point in being over-protective quite just yet. Denied for now. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 20:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

10 February, 2009

  1. Three-five - just look at the poor guy's history and see if he should be protected finally Mauser 04:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC).
    • Semi-protected, with expiration in May. jSarek 06:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

1 January, 2009

  1. Please make The Clone Wars: Season I semi-protected. It's a page constantly attracting speculation and I already reverted unsourced addition twice. Better leave it closed from newbies. Mauser 18:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Semi-protected, with expiration in June. Note, though, that The2ndQuest, who made the last edit, is not only a long-time (albeit infrequent) contributor, but also a generally knowledgeable chap with good standing in fandom; you might want to address some of your questions about the sources of these new edits to his talk page. jSarek 22:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

December, 2008

  • Can Crix Madine be semi protected? some anon(s) keep changing it into Bad Haircut something over the last few days and it's starting to become a silly edit war. MadclawShyriiwook! 16:32, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Toprawa got it. jSarek 22:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Old/unsorted requests

  • Jedi Exile - This is getting way out of hand just banning new or unregistered users isn't doing much to solve the vandalism problem. Save the trouble and just shield it - from all users. --RedemptionTalk Uglykotoricon 22:24, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Aquatic Assault Armored Transport—User:VT-16 continues to add the unsourced abbreviation "AA-AT" to the article. Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 00:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Anakin Skywalker it is getting out of hand how many edits there is on this one article. Darth Raul (join the sith order)
  • Some one deleted my image and used on their user page!NOT FAIR--mas1@ 04:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Revan. Just look at the edit history. Sarendipity (Talk to me) 02:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
    • It seems like it already is. Sikon did it back in January. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Ok it was partially protected. IP addresses cannot edit it now. -- Riffsyphon1024 03:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
        • Okay, great. Should it have a template saying it's protected? Sarendipity (Talk to me) 03:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Jaina Solo - Was protected until a week ago and has been hit by an IP vandal repeatedly today. At least semi-protect. Thanks. -Fnlayson 22:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
    • I gave Mr. The Penis Rules All (and no, that is not his username) a warning. If he does it again, I'll block him and semiprotect the article for a month. -- SFH 22:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
      • Nevermind, Darth Culator just semiprotected it and blocked the individual. -- SFH 22:43, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
      • Thanks Culator & SFH. -Fnlayson 22:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Force Destruction has been getting a few repeated un-sourced things added. Perhaps a cool-down would be possible? Din's Fire 997 06:43, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Battle of Coruscant (Clone Wars). A lot of questionable anon edits. Chack Jadson (Talk) 22:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Capes. Do not let it be created please and please protect the page from its creation because Capes is a huge spam page and there is no capes in Star Wars.(Eagle Eye 370 03:24, 31 August 2008 (UTC))

Why and what are you saying? You to don't want the page to be created?(Eagle Eye 370 03:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC))

Requests for unprotection

10/11/19

  1. Mandalore the Ultimate I would like to suggest that Mandalore the Ultimate's protection levels are lowered to semi-protection or unprotected. His wiki page appears to be greatly outdated, as several retcons have occurred years past the information in the article. There are also multiple traits regarding the character that could be made into catergories for the page (such as his skills or equipment), but are not because of its locked protection settings.LeDebonairian (talk) 10:17, October 11, 2019 (UTC)
    • I myself have many new details to offer for the character in terms of his quotes, aliases, equipment, skills, apperance, and personality, and of course intend on doing so with the proper sources cited. I do hope you an admin can work this out, as I'm quite eager to expand on Mandalore the Ultimate's profile. Thank you.
      • It appears to me that the article is already semi-protected. Tommy Imperial Emblem Macaroni 10:26, October 11, 2019 (UTC)

09/09/2018

  1. Ki-Adi-Mundi's lightsaber I would like to request the removal of the protection from the article, the protection was placed in 2016 to avoid the creation of it because it was non notable, now with Star Wars Lightsabers: A Guide to Weapons of the Force there's notability for Mundi's lightsaber, first the lightsaber was inspired by Cerean culture and second the lightsaber had two kyber crystals in it, something that makes it more notable than other lightsabers. Since an anon user created the page using /canon and then another user moved it in some way that the link reads %D0%A1anon. I'm requesting the unprotection so Ki-Adi-Mundi's lightsaber/%D0%A1anon|Ki-Adi-Mundi's lightsaber/%D0%A1anon can be moved there--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 10:09, September 9, 2018 (UTC)
    • I'm lowering the protection because the notability of lightsabers, or lack thereof, is something that has repeatedly failed to gain any clear consensus on Wookieepedia. The former administrator who originally placed this protection on the article was wrong to do so on the grounds of it not having notability, because that's a subjective opinion, unless it was done under the New canon subjects clause of the Notability policy (which cannot be determined). That being said, this isn't the forum for arguing lightsabers' notability or lack thereof; rather, you get to create this article by default because rules have yet to be established. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 15:04, September 9, 2018 (UTC)

03/12/2018

  1. Imperial control sector was protected back in 2008 and it hasn't been vandalized in nearly 10 years. I see no reason it should continue to be protected. - AV-6R7Crew Pit 00:14, March 13, 2018 (UTC)

June 23, 2017

I would like to request that the protection level be lowered from full to semi or super-semi for:

  • Template:DB — history says "protected due to being high risk template" in 2006, though no evidence of risk was provided and not a single instance of vandalism had occurred prior. It was briefly lowered and raised again, without explanation, in 2008.
  • Template:W — history shows this was semi-protected in 2008, then bumped to full protection in 2009 based on a single incident in the intervening seven months (by a user who is now banned). Super-semi would be a reasonable level for this one.

The notes above attempt to document that semi- or super-semi-protection would be sufficient to block the types of vandalism these templates have experienced. (I'd actually be very surprised if super-semi-protected pages were ever vandalized—anyone who creates an account just for vandalism will be blocked before they get to 150 edits, and anyone who's stuck around long enough to make that many good-faith edits probably isn't doing it just to create a platform from which to vandalize later.)

More philosophically, letting long-established users edit pages such as these is a good way to indicate trust in them, strengthening the community. It's an acknowledgement that a wiki isi a collaborative platform, and a wide range of people have positive contributions to make. Even minor cosmetic changes improve the wiki, and that burden needn't be on a small group of admins alone.

For things that aren't the Main Page or policy pages or such, it seems easier for an admin to adjust the protection level and allow others to fix things, rather than having to fix everything themselves. It also saves a step, since otherwise a regular user must describe the change to an admin rather than just making it directly. Many hands, light work, and all that rot.

Thanks for considering this. Asithol (talk) 05:37, June 23, 2017 (UTC)

  • I'm declining this request at this time not because I don't trust the userbase, but because there is no need to edit the templates in question at this time. This is especially the case with {{W}}—it was officially approved at a Mofference and any changes would need to go through a community discussion. Furthermore, due to caching, vandalism to widely transcluded templates can be visible long after the edits have been reverted. Should there arise a need to edit either template, I'll gladly lower the protection levels. Cheers, 1358 (Talk) 21:39, July 17, 2017 (UTC)
    • To clarify, in case it affects your decision: Both templates could use updates—I requested them for that reason, not just to generally loosen protection for hypothetical future updates. For {{W}}, I would not alter the wording at all, just update one link target. For {{DB}}, a few points in the Instructions could use clarification or amendments. Thank you. Asithol (talk) 22:08, July 20, 2017 (UTC)
      • For the record, I would also have denied this request. Whatever protection-history edit summary you're reading from 2007 or 2008 or whatever is effectively irrelevant. Any site-wide template that doesn't require regular updating should be fully-protected as a matter of procedure for simple security reasons due to the far-reaching ramifications any potential vandalism will have. The general userbase has no reason whatsoever anyway to be modifying these templates, particularly since any content changes to templates like W or Eras typically needs to go through consensus approval, as ecks pointed out. In the exceedingly rare instance a regular user needs to edit one of these templates, a simple administrative request will suffice. Toprawa and Ralltiir (talk) 22:51, July 20, 2017 (UTC)

November 3, 2016

I would like to request that the protection level be lowered from full to semi for:

  • Wookieepedia:Jedi Exile — it is unclear from the history why this is full-protected: there has only ever been one vandal, in 2007, who is now blocked.
  • Template:Hnn — history says "protected due to being high risk template" in 2006, though no evidence of risk was provided and not a single instance of vandalism had occurred prior.
  • Template:DB — ditto everything in the previous bullet point; in addition, it was briefly lowered and raised again, without explanation, in 2008.
  • Template:W — history shows this was semi-protected in 2008, then bumped to full protection in 2009 based on a single incident in the intervening seven months (by a user who is now banned). Super-semi would be a reasonable level for this one.

Thanks for considering this. Asithol (talk) 00:20, November 3, 2016 (UTC)

April 3, 2016

  1. Ahsoka Tano: I believe the Ahsoka Tano page should be moved from super semi-protected to semi-protected so that more users that have not reached the 150 edit mark can edit the page. The page is sub-par and requires a lot of editing, and there are many people who would like to help but cannot because they have not broken the 150 edit threshold yet. Most other pages of major characters are either only semi-protected or are not even protected at all. In order to help contributors make Wookieepedia the best that it can be, I believe this page's protection is excessive and should be changed. How can contributors be bold if Wookieepedia does not allow them to? -Thatgirlwiththestaff (talk) 19:04, April 3, 2016 (UTC)
    • Hi there. Both Ahsoka articles (Legends and Canon) are and have been constant targets of vandalism and low-quality edits and with the SWR season finale I am sure that the Canon article would be an even bigger target. I have therefore declined this request for now. 1358 (Talk) 21:28, April 5, 2016 (UTC)

March 18, 2014

Canon: Needs to be updated for recent developments. Also, a permanent full protection violates the Wookieepedia:Protection policy. Therefor, please reduce protection level to semiprotected. Gulomi Jomesh (talk) 22:32, March 18, 2014 (UTC)

  • Due to the excessive amount of vandalism, and the subject's importance, the article will remain fully protected. If the article requires updating, then please use its talk page. JangFett (Talk) 22:37, March 18, 2014 (UTC)

March 19th, 2012

  1. 192 BBY - I now know of a valid source for 192 BBY, so I would like to request that the page be unprotected from re-creation. --Jinzler 20:18, March 19, 2012 (UTC)
    • Protection was only for new and unregistered users, but lowered to full access anyway. Go for it. Toprawa and Ralltiir 20:22, March 19, 2012 (UTC)

December 4, 2011

  1. Went to go add a new source/category to File:DeathStar2.jpg and it's been locked since March of 2009. I think 2 and a half years protection is sufficient. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 22:03, December 4, 2011 (UTC)
    • Protection lowered to sprot. CC7567 (talk) 03:12, December 7, 2011 (UTC)

October 5, 2011

  1. Asajj Ventress for a proper correction in understanding origin material.—Unsigned comment by 99.188.36.80 (talk • contribs)
    • The article is only semi-protected, and the subject's continued presence in recent materials leads me to believe the original reason for protection has not diminished. So, unless you have further arguments that the article should no longer be semi-protected, I'm inclined to leave it as is. If you want to edit it, feel free to register; in a few days and with a few edits to unprotected articles, the semi-protection will no longer apply to you. Alternatively, you can make suggestions for further edits on the talk page. jSarek 04:51, October 5, 2011 (UTC)

10 June 2010

  1. Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic 3 is transcluded in Wookieepedia:Constantly recreated pages, which is full- and cascade-protected. This has the unwanted side effect of causing every template on the KotOR 3 page to also become full-protected. One in particular, {{Kotor}}, needs editing to fix redirect links caused by Project Colon. Being unfamiliar with the KotOR games, I do not know why or when the article was protected in this way, or whether it still needs such protection. Either way, it needs be removed from WP:CRP to get rid of the side effect above and, if it still needs it, protected in the normal way. Thanks. —Master Jonathan New Jedi Order (Jedi Council Chambers) 06:02, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

January 4, 2010

  1. File:Lando smoothie.jpg—Firstly, I would like to add categories and fix the source link, and secondly, there is no good reason for this image to be protected. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 05:10, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
    • It was protected because it was included in the Cape article, which was on WP:CRP even though it was created legitimately some time ago. Should be fixed now. jSarek 06:35, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
    • I see. I was trying to figure out how an image file could be a constantly recreated page. Thanks jSarek. Category and source link fixed now if it needs to be re-protected. - JMAS Jolly Trooper Hey, it's me! 13:05, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

December 29, 2009

  1. Agen Kolar—now confirmed not to be appearing in The Clone Wars, and shouldn't have any problems for the time being. Needs an update for the Clone Wars mess-up, though. CC7567 (talk) 21:02, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
    • Changed to semi-protect. Let me (or someone) know if vandalism picks up though. Chack Jadson (Talk) 21:07, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

12 November 2009

  1. I'd like to request that someone unprotects Barriss Offee and Aayla Secura's pages. No one has put anything into Aayla's personality and traits section and Barriss doesn't even have a personality and traits or a powers and abilities section. I'd also like it if Ahsoka Tano's page was unprotected but I understand if you want her page to remain protected. —Unsigned comment by 87.115.21.185 (talk • contribs)
    • Done for all three, but we'll be watching for vandalism on Aayla and Ahsoka. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 18:46, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

06 October, 2009

  1. Template:Msg-fanon: I'd like to make a minor tweak to the template's formatting without changing the template's content or design (the design only avoids the source being cluttered with unnecessary if-clauses). You can reprotect it again after the edit is made. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 15:14, October 6, 2009 (UTC)
    • I'll wait for a more coding-minded administrator to make a decision on this, but I would like to point out that the last time you made such an edit to one of our templates (see edit history for Template:Talkheader), everything had to be reverted because it completely screwed things up. Toprawa and Ralltiir 16:49, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

10 September, 2009

  1. Star Wars Customizable Card Game has been fully protected for almost two years now. Surely there's no reason not to drop it at least semi-protected, as I'd like to make some minor edits. MauserComlink 16:25, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

14 July, 2009

  1. Template:Majorspoiler — reduce to semi-protection and move protection. I see no reason for this to be full protected, plus I have a slight tweak that would use an optional parameter to identify the name of the source(s) that the spoiler is/are from (seen here and User:Master Jonathan/Award templates|here) that I would like to implement. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 04:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Well, I see no reason for it to be protected now, and I like your idea. Before you change it, however, I'd recommend talking to a couple others just to get their take on it if you haven't already. I think it will be approved though. At any rate, it's now unprotected. Chack Jadson (Talk) 14:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

4 June, 2009

  1. Gavyn Sykes and Fox (clone commander) have both been fully protected since at least March due to edit wars that should've ended by now. -- I need a name (Complain here) 19:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

10 May 2009

  1. Please lower the protection level of File:AhsokaSlave.jpg to at least semi-protected so I can properly re-categorize it. MauserComlink 10:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

15 March 2009

  1. Galen Marek - both the article and talk pages are locked and I think there may be some canon mistakes still in the article.—Unsigned comment by 88.108.131.42 (talk • contribs)
    I'm unlocking the talk page, but I'll leave it up to another admin who's more familiar with the article to decide if the indefinite semi-protection on the article is still needed. —Silly Dan (talk) 13:29, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

December, 2008

-- I need a name (Complain here) 21:52, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Old/unsorted requests

  • Juno Eclipse Could you please unprotect Juno, as there will be additional information coming about her and the girl portraying her in the latest add-on of the swccg "The Force Unleashed" virtual card pack. User: Starfighter15175
  • Luke Skywalker I think Luke's page sould be unprotected for a little while so his talents section could be updated as he showed extraordinary powers in Sacrifice (book) and Inferno (book). User:MrScioli
  • Gray Jedi. It has been a month since the vandal hit it, and I need to make some major editing to the page including adding apperances. User: Kilson
  • Zekk. The sentence "He looked on as Jacen and Tenel Ka were stunned and left on unconscious on the floor." needs to be corrected. User:Serendipitousus
  • Zekk. The current 'sexual preference' thing is fine how it is, and it should have some other updates...Bounty Hunter Ko-Zap 15:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Alright, I unshielded Zekk since it has been protected from anonymous users since the middle of July. –SentryTalk 06:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm curious, what happened to the Palpatine page to put it under protection? Jedi Wolf 7:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
    • On second thought, I'd rather have the Battle of Muunilist page unprotected for a few minutes. Jedi Wolf 1:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Luke Skywalker. We need to edit it soon, with Inferno on the way and more info on Fury bound to come soon. Jediknight19bby 19:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Luke Skywalker. What the hell? Havac 04:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Palpatine. It's been 4 months and the person who caused it hasn't made on edit since. 24.158.198.170 09:46, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
    • It has been protected from anonymous users since July. I have now unprotected it. Happy editing, SentryTalk 10:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Sorry about last time, Havac. I was wondering though, is the situation with the Battle of Muunilinst entry all set or not, because it's been several months now and I just wanted to make one quick little edit. Jedi Wolf 2:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
    • While I agree that the article has been protected for a ridiculously long time, I think that you might want to talk to Kuralyov as he was the one who protected it.–SentryTalk 20:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Kuralyov unblocked it for you.–SentryTalk 22:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
      • My Luke Skywalker comment didn't ahve anything to do with you. I was adding a separate request for unprotection. I really don't see why each request is getting its own header when there's no individualization of it. In fact, I think I'll tweak the format. Havac 22:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Jedi Exile - It's been semi-protected for nearly 4 months, and near as I can tell it's been about 3 since the last time a vandal hit it. Red XIV 04:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Jacen Solo - It's nothing major, but I'm going through the Forum:Great Typo Hunt|Great Typo Hunt, and there's a couple of cases where "Human" and "Humanocentric" aren't capitalized. Like I said, nothing that important. Jwebb13HoloNetSith Emblem

01:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Main Page I want to edit and take the side of the people who want it changed back.
    • Sorry, but no. We've protected the main page for a reason. Greyman(Paratus) 00:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Kreia - This page is really (in my opinion) under-edited, can we please open it so I can add my material?
  • Ysalamir—Protected over two months ago, should be unlocked. Granted, it's only semi-protected, but I still think it's unnecessary. Chack Jadson (Talk) 16:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Jedi Exile - I want this page unprotected because I want to add the name of a couple Jedi Masters that she was trained under.
    • Unfortunately, that page is a high valued target for vandalism, and as such the current protection level (against anonymous and newly registered users) will unfortunately have to stay there. Greyman(Paratus) 04:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • LEGO Star Wars: The Complete Saga - yawn, everyone want's to unprotect it, especially since the game is finally out lol. Danfun360 21:42, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
  • let unregistered users edit this page so I can add info about the PSP version. The PSP version is getting exclusive content!
  • Jedi - There are a few minor edits that need to be made. Would it be alright to unblock this article? Qui-Gon Reborn 06:37, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Lightsabers I need to edit, I have proof of a Jedi who used a red lightsaber during the Clone Wars.

Anakin Skywalker I would like to talk about how people think Darth Plagueis had a part in Anakin's downfall.

  • The "Force Unleashed" Pages - I have done what I can to edit what is unprotected but I cannot make further contributions to that area if it is protected. I am speaking of revelations from the novel. Appreciate any help I can get. Thanks. Jacob Nion Starkiller vs Vader (Personal Comm) 02:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
    • As for me, I'd say we give some space between the comma and Shaak Ti in paragraph 8 of Serving the Emperor. Serious flaw. Also, we'll need to mention Jacob's name, his father killed, love with Juno, redemption by Rahm Kota, and death at the hands of Sidious. I demand you guys do something about it immediately or may Lord in heaven strike thee down! After all, the article does need a clean up as it says in the template. 72.82.5.142 23:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

How about Galen Marek? We would to put in extra pictures, quotes, categories, wiki articles, and such. Besides, JN has a big point on that one and I agree with him. 131.109.225.3 15:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Cybernetics No reason to protect.(Eagle Eye 370 03:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

Eye Whats with all the protection spree including X-Wing and Star Destroyer?(Eagle Eye 370 03:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

Human This is getting ridiculous. Again Whats with the protection spree including Clone Wars and Order 66 which exterminates the Jedi on full extinction?(Eagle Eye 370 04:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

Ahsoka Tano Again this is getting ridiculous. Whats with the protection sprees including Starfighter?(Eagle Eye 370 04:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

Shaak Ti Nonsense reason for protection.(Eagle Eye 370 04:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

Tank (vehicle) No reason to protect and also the admin that protected it and refuse to tell why it needs to be protected.(Eagle Eye 370 04:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC))

  • Request denied. These pages are protected from anonymous editing due to a pattern of vandalism. Their protection does not affect you, and further requests by you on this page will be considered disruption and you will be blocked accordingly. Then their protection will affect you. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 04:45, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


I-a2b solar ionization reactor - I think this article has stayed in stasis for long enough now. Gonna change some of the wording, given all the ships and their large reactors that have come out since it was written in the WEG era, but other than that, it's cool. VT-16 19:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

  • You're all clear, kid. jSarek 00:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Rogue Shadow - There isn't/wasn't a pattern of vandalism, and hasn't been vandalized since. Dr.Kermit(Babble here) 02:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

  • Done. -LtNOWIS 07:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)