Wikipedia:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.

Shortcuts WP:RFPP WP:RFP WP:RPP 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. Skip to table of contents requests to raise protection lower protection requested edits (purge) Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level Request protection Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level Request unprotection Request a specific edit to a protected page Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here Request edit

this header: view • edit

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.

Aftermath (Rolling Stones album)

• Aftermath (Rolling Stones album) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Today's featured article. Vandalism like this likely to trend up... isento (talk) 02:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. El_C 12:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shower (precipitation)

• Shower (precipitation) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: IP is adding incorrect information, and while trying to provide an explanation, I want to prevent an edit war. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 03:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator Deepfriedokra. El_C 12:15, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sufism

• Sufism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. HurricaneEdgar 12:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked.

Pending-changes protected indefinitely. El_C 12:33, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish people

• Turkish people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: A lot of disruptive editing. Beshogur (talk) 13:04, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jammes (video game)

• Jammes (video game) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – My edits on this articles to reach extended-confirmed rights are marked as disruptive and so my extended-confirmed rights are gone. This redirect should be extended-protected for that reason so that even myself can't edit it. Once I get extended-confirmed rights again, it should be unprotected. LucianoTheWindowsFan (talk) 13:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: You request can be declined, because there is no vandalism or distruptive edits by IP/unregistered or new users by months. You are automatically extended confirmed users because more than 500 edits even including deletion and your edits are actually reverted by Onel5969, which also has extended confirmed rights. 180.254.166.107 (talk) 13:33, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cumulus congestus cloud

• Cumulus congestus cloud (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Semi-protection: This page seems to be the target of IP and new vandal users since November. They all try change the description from cumulus congestus of the one for cumulonimbus. It seems a systematic attack and the language make me think it is from school IPs. The article should be protected until the en of the school year. Pierre cb (talk) 13:35, 15 April 2021 (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.

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.

Turkmeneli

• Turkmeneli (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Block: User Semsûrî keeps on reverting edits and claiming that the map and Anthem should be sourced (they're very clear and don't need to be sourced)....... . Kirkukturk3 (talk) 15:43, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See editor's talk page. 20:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

San Francisco

• San Francisco (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Unprotection: Whitelock was added 7 years ago for disruptive editing, and there no longer is as much disruptive editing. For the article of an important American city, it's probably better not to whitelock. Josethewikier (talk) 00:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Per WP:WHITELOCK, Indefinite PC protection should be used only in cases of severe long-term disruption. Any thoughts, Maile66, about this? Perhaps it can be ended. Is semiprotection necessary in its place? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind if it's changed, but I'd rather another adim do it for me. Right now things are a little busy on my end. So, if another admin would do the change, I'd be fine with that. — Maile (talk) 17:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Unprotected per WP:TRYUNPROT. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brianna Wu

• Brianna Wu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary full protection: I'm not against a goldlock protection and I can understand arbcom's decision, however it would be ideal if the protection is temporary (even if it's 4 years or something like that); if that fails immediately, then should we consider a definitive indefinite goldlock protection. Josethewikier (talk) 00:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:54, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It already is Indefinately Fully protected. 74.14.6.233 (talk) 04:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite full protection? Was there a discussion among ARBCOM that lead to that decision? Otherwise I wonder if indefinite ECP is the way to go. Pinging protecting admins Courcelles and AmandaNP. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Muboshgu: There was not as far as I remember a discussion with all of ArbCom about this. Potentially individual members, I can't remember. That said, there is a very good reason behind it. This article is a target of accounts that are evading ECP, and already caused the WP:SELDEL of 427 edits. There are also 17 suppressions by oversighters done on this page. I also know the outside of wikipedia source of these concerning edits, which for multiple reasons including WP:BEANS, I can't say here. -- Amanda (she/her) 17:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declined "Evading ECP" is all that I needed to hear. This person's involvement in GamerGate may be over, but her recent comments about the Gaza War keep her in the spotlight here. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:27, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Kallarangatt

• Joseph Kallarangatt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: The protection is not needed as the disruptive edits by unnecessarily reverting are done by an extended confirmed user. The disruptive edits(reverting) are [1] [2] [3]. These constant and complete revertings of contributions done by multiple users prevents the improvements done to the page. That particular user is alerted in the talk page of the article and hasn't yet provided evidence to his claims. Not blanket page protection but page protection from this particular user is the one needed. അദ്വൈതൻ (talk) 16:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not an argument for unprotection, given the BLP issues FrancisSobieski123 (talk · contribs) introduced right before the ECP. If anything, that's an argument to escalate it to full-protection until a discussion has actually run its course. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting contributions of multiple users citing an unreliability of a citation added by one user is injustice. Already the article lacks Neutral point of View(under the section Pastoral ministry and sub section love and narcotics jihad controversy ) that too on a living person, the reverting has undid my multiple contributions too, all with reliable sources that was to address this issue. That particular user's blanket reverting has done no improvement to the page. And that user who reverted my contributions hasn't yet provided evidence to his claim in the article's talk page when asked അദ്വൈതൻ (talk) 17:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're still making a case for escalating the protection, not downgrading it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you are saying about full protection because the user who is blatantly reverting is an extended confirmed+ user, correct? അദ്വൈതൻ (talk) 17:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, and because this is a content dispute. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:42, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what the solution apart from discussing in the article's talk page. As the particular user hasn't yet replied to substantiate its claims in the talk page. അദ്വൈതൻ (talk) 17:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Star Wars: The Last Jedi

• Star Wars: The Last Jedi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Temporary pending changes: Persistent disruptive editing – Consistent disruptive editing by one user that went on for 2 Edit pages. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 13:35, 15 April 2021 (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.

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.

Israel–Hamas war

• Israel–Hamas war (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Under "Long term goals of Hamas", please replace "with founding Hamas members[who?] saying that" by " with founding Hamas member Mahmoud al-Zahar saying that" FcMeOH (talk) 12:38, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source? Once you start naming names, you need to have the sources to back it up. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:50, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. @Jéské Couriano: the citation is already given at the end of that sentence. Whoever slapped the "who?" tag on that sentence didn't bother to look at the citation. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Create a level 3 header with a link to the article in question, then a {{pagelinks}} template and then the reason.

A rolling archive of the last seven days of protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Rolling archive.