Wikipedia:Requests for page protection
| Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here. | ||
|---|---|---|
|
Before requesting, read the protection policy. Full protection is used to stop edit warring between multiple users or to prevent vandalism to high-risk templates; semi-protection and pending changes are usually used to prevent IP and new user vandalism (see the rough guide to semi-protection); and move protection is used to stop pagemove revert wars. Extended confirmed protection is used where semi-protection has proved insufficient (see the rough guide to extended confirmed protection) After a page has been protected, it is listed in the page history and logs with a short rationale, and the article is listed on Special:Protectedpages. In the case of full protection due to edit warring, admins should not revert to specific versions of the page, except to get rid of obvious vandalism.
Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level
Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level
Request a specific edit to a protected page
Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here | ||
|
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 |
Current requests for increase in protection level
Place requests for new or upgrading of article protection, upload protection, or create 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.
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Page is being used to make POV attacks on RFK jnr, who has the condition that is the article subject. Flat Out (talk) 23:40, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. This is a very slow-moving edit war involving the insertion, deletion, and reinsertion of a few words in a long article with the edits and counter-edits occurring (mostly) at multiple day intervals. Because the edits in question are not blatant vandalism or (as far as I can tell, but correct me if I'm wrong) BLP violations, there needs to be some evidence of discussion having first been attempted. Otherwise, protection would serve merely to enforce registered users preferences over those of IP editors. Moreover, even if protection were warranted, moving a page with no history of protection to indefinite protection would be a serious overreach. If there are WP:3RR violations (which doesn't appear to be the case), this can be reported at WP:AN/3RR. Chetsford (talk) 03:15, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason: While vandalism has slowed due to the previous increase, it is clear that edits continue to be biased and partisan in nature, often including biased or bad sources, or the removal of information that doesn't suit political agendas, such as mentions of disabled veterans. I recommend that this page be given full protection. Dswdon (talk) 23:57, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. Over the last week, the article is seeing an average of two edits per day (and that number includes very minor edits like capitalization changes). Full protection is an exceptional suspension of our ethos of open collaboration that is generally reserved for only the most dire or exigent situations. Semi-protection appears adequate for now, however, if the situation deteriorates feel free to file a new request. Thank you for keeping an eye on the article, Dswdon. Chetsford (talk) 03:04, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – Relevant to WP:ARBPIA, thanks!. Smallangryplanet (talk) 00:25, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Any thoughts? No recent problems that I can see have occurred. I know anything remotely PIA can be protected now, but are we going to do them one-by-one via requests here? Johnuniq (talk) 03:49, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- If this were only remotely related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, a lack of recent disruption would be a good reason to decline protection. But this is a military operation between the the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Israel Defense Forces, so it's certainly a primary article (such that all edits to the page are subject to the extended confirmed restriction) and "strictly within the Arab-Israeli conflict topic area [such that it] shall be extended confirmed protected by default, without requiring prior disruption on the article".
Extended confirmed protected. SilverLocust 💬 05:19, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- If this were only remotely related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, a lack of recent disruption would be a good reason to decline protection. But this is a military operation between the the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Israel Defense Forces, so it's certainly a primary article (such that all edits to the page are subject to the extended confirmed restriction) and "strictly within the Arab-Israeli conflict topic area [such that it] shall be extended confirmed protected by default, without requiring prior disruption on the article".
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Call me paranoid, but I believe this deserves to be indefinitely (or at the very least, temporarily) semi-protected, since most of the edits to this page have been unconstructive. OpalYosutebito (talk) 04:35, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- @OpalYosutebito: That's difficult. It won't be indefinitely protected but it conceivably could qualify for temporary. The problem is that the bad posts by IPs are occurring roughly every two or four weeks (I did not see any good posts). Generally, that is regarded as not enough of a problem to warrant protection. I'll leave this for other opinions. Johnuniq (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Society for the Defence of Palestinian Nation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Reason: Extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – WP:A/I/PIA. The article covered by this AfD is within scope of the restrictions. Please protect the AfD so that WP:ARBECR compliance can be handled by the server rather than manually by editors. Sean.hoyland (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Extended confirmed protected indefinitely. Johnuniq (talk) 04:58, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason: High level of vandalism Rjensen (talk) 05:08, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Frequent vandalism recently. Stickymatch 06:21, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent unreferenced edits from IP users. Hotwiki (talk) 06:23, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Semi-protection: Page is regularly getting IP vandalism due to football rivalry and the political name associations. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 06:56, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin on 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.
No protection: No longer necessary. 1250metersdeep (talk) 17:33, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Why is it no longer necessary? Please expand your rationale. — Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:30, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason: The page no longer attracts vandalism as the subject is no longer contentious. The person is no longer active in politics and the page view is low compared to previous data. The page is only protected due to one vandalism attempt by an IP address which had not edited wikipedia since. I see no reason why there could be persistent vandalism once the protection is decreased. Therefore, I request that the page be no longer protected. CS012831 (talk) 20:17, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Unplugged to Semi-Protected or lower The reason why i am raising the concern, is just not for outlasting the Provocative auspicious version while attributing the Bhatti class article which somehow rapidly targeted by intrusion of sock blockages and many more WP:LTA account, for just misleading or trim the whole Jat
word in bold continuity which unlikely to be liberating the WP:Good faith edit, furthermore i want to reclined the containment of sighting the new changes done by this user is seemingly WP:POVFORK who are identically socking the old attacker [1] for altering the Jats words which itself emend under WP:CASTEID contradiction, in order to mitigate further manipulation while allowing constructive contributions, I propose reducing the protection level to Semi-Protected or lower. 157.66.26.252 (talk) 04:49, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- This unprotection request is borderline-incomprehensible, but to the extent that it is understandable, you're basically requesting to lower the protection (from XCP to SP) because of sockpuppetry? That's akin to canceling your fire insurance because an arsonist is busy pouring gasoline on your front stoop. The caste-related chest-thumping will not be entertained. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:42, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Current requests for edits to a protected page
Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
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.
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.