Talk:Chanty Marostica

edit fully protected
A recent edit introduced libel to this page in an attempt to defame the character of its subject. Unproven allegations have been made against Chanty Marostica. I would like to see this page edit fully protected until such time as these allegations can be proven one way or another. The edits were made without accreditation, because at this time, no charges have been filed, and no evidence of wrongdoing has been given. Onlyseekingtruth (talk) 15:27, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * This is not, for the record, the process for requesting protection of an unprotected page; it is the process for requesting changes to a page that is already under protection. Requests to add protection have to be made at WP:RFPP, not with the "edit fully protected" template. Regardless, I have revision-deleted the offending content, and placed the page under partial semiprotection for the time being; that is, it's blocked to IPs and newly-registered users, but not yet to established users. We can escalate to higher levels of protection if that proves inadequate, but we can't jump to the strictest level of protection right off the bat. Bearcat (talk) 17:13, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 May 2020
I am writing you to request permission simply to speak the truth. The CBC and major Canadian news outlets have effectively suppressed the story which in turn puts people in danger. I have proof, notes, and sources to cite, this is not slander nor is it libel, it is a factual account of this person's behaviour which they must own up to and others must be aware of. Wikipedia I urge you not to slide down the same path that other high traffic websites have in recent months with blatant self censorship regarding the true nature of the world we live in, to not relinquish your integrity because the parlance of our times forced your hand into doing so. 2607:FEA8:1300:10C:2DF1:459E:F2A2:27E9 (talk) 14:51, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:35, 24 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree with the above—reliable source required. First, information must be found in reliable sources, then it can be considered for inclusion in an article. Bus stop (talk) 15:56, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does not exist as a platform for disseminating unsourced claims about people's private lives. Our job here is to follow media coverage, not to lead it — if you can't get the claims covered by the media, then it is not our job or our responsibility or our mandate to let you bypass that problem by publishing unsourced statements here instead of in the media. Whether you consider it "censorship" or not simply doesn't matter: it is not our role to be the originating publisher of any claims about living people that have not already been verified and published by the media first. Our job is to summarize the journalism that has already been done by the media, not to do journalism, or investigate or publish claims that haven't already been reported in the media, ourselves. Bearcat (talk) 16:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I have redacted unsourced allegations. Please do not repeat them anywhere on Wikipedia without a source. Nil Einne (talk) 11:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)