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.
Reason: High levels of vandalism. Marc Elias is a progressive voting rights and elections attorney. This page is intentionally being targeted by people who oppose his politics. They are misleading readers regarding Donald Trump's 2020 election loss to Joe Biden and spreading disinformation about Trump associates’ connections to Russian officials and interests. This page needs to be fact checked by serious fact checkers and protected from vandals. 2600:8805:250C:3200:BD90:3AAA:4171:CA5C (talk) 01:26, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- Please enforce WP:CT/AP. IanDBeacon (talk) 04:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
+1 Reason: High levels of vandalism and false information. The 2016 Trump campaign was linked to Russian officials: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868/. Attempts to add context were reverted by other user(s). Marc Elias has many followers on social media, and this page could be used to intentionally spread falsehoods. पर्वत चोटी (talk) 02:06, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. For now it looks like the editors have things under control. I have no doubt that this page could be a target, but we don't pre-emptively protect pages. Daniel Case (talk) 03:00, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: High level of IP vandalism/edit warring by IPs from Malaysia and Turkey since end of December. Despite heroic efforts by an editor to revert these, there were so many bad IP edits that the article still has subtle remnants. Edit warring/vandalism done by at least 3 different IPs from 2 countries so can't just block a single one unfortunately. AncientWalrus (talk) 03:14, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I only see two actual reverts this month. The problems you describe might be better dealt with by reverting to a version predating those edits entirely and adding to it anything you think the IPs introduced that was worthwhile. Daniel Case (talk) 03:05, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: This movie is based on historical novel, I want to protect page to prevent incorrect information. Kiranpawar3210 (talk) 06:03, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Question: We don't preemptively protect pages. Is there disruption now? What type and by what users? — rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: High level of IP vandalism Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:14, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Done ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 01:36, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Done for the bot again. Swatjester, you need to use the RfPP templates, or the bot would not archive the request. El_C 04:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent unreferenced edits from IP users. Hotwiki (talk) 10:43, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 10:48, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. When few if any of them seem to be reverted, it's hard to see that there's a problem. Daniel Case (talk) 03:31, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Vandalism and current controversial topic Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 00:37, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Not seeing it yet. I will add a CTOPS notice to the talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 03:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite extended protection: Arbitration Enforcement. WP:ARBPIA 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they) talk/edits 00:37, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Yes, relevant to the topic but hardly a nexus to the current conflict. Daniel Case (talk) 03:57, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism. BilCat (talk) 01:24, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Done ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 01:31, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 01:35, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Done for the bot. El_C 04:23, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent addition of "Gulf of America" by new users. Jfire (talk) 02:28, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
User(s) blocked. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 02:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary pending changes protection: Persistent vandalism. Vandalism likely to continue over the next few days in the lead up to Australia Day (26 January) Cabrils (talk) 03:54, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 04:06, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. atop the existing indef PC. Daniel Case (talk) 04:21, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Semi-protection should not be used as a preemptive measure against vandalism that has not yet occurred (so this is inconsistent with the Protection Policy WP:PP). In-addition, 6 months is also excessive. The article is already very hostile to new users with the permanent pending changes protection (which in itself, is meant to be used very rarely and doesn't seem justified either). So, rather than just make a summary decision, you should justify why it has been done and provide evidence for it, and explain why the length of protection time was selected. 185.218.127.37 (talk) 05:11, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 04:52, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: IPs repeatitly vandalizing the article GoodDay (talk) 04:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary pending changes protection: Persistent disruptive editing. Recent repeated disruptive editing Cabrils (talk) 04:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent misgendering and vandalism of a trans BLP. Requesting as a WP:GENSEX enforcement action. Funcrunch (talk) 05:06, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: IPs vandalizing article GoodDay (talk) 05:11, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: There was an involved protection request here that failed to mention that several of the users edit warring are extended confirmed. Requesting full protection until the RfC concludes. BMWF (talk) 05:22, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite full move-protection: Contentious topic restriction. Should be full-move protected per Netanyahu and Israel articles. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 05:26, 24 January 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.
Reason: I am writing to respectfully request the removal of the edit protection on the "Foundational Black Americans" page. I believe that the current state of the page does not accurately represent the term and may inadvertently mislead readers.
Issue at Hand:
When searching for "Foundational Black Americans," the page redirects to an individual, which does not provide a definition or proper context of the term. This is concerning because:
Misrepresentation: "Foundational Black Americans" refers to a lineage of Black Americans whose ancestors were enslaved in the United States and have developed a distinct cultural heritage over generations. It is not a term beholden to any single person or leader.
Ethnogenesis and Cultural Significance: Black Americans have undergone a unique process of ethnogenesis, evolving from labels such as "Negro" and "Colored" to "African American," and now embracing "Foundational Black Americans" to acknowledge their specific historical and cultural identity.
Potential Misinformation: Redirecting to an individual's page may contribute to misinformation and does not align with Wikipedia's commitment to providing neutral and accurate information.
Request:
I kindly request that the edit protection be lifted to allow for collaborative efforts in:
Creating a Dedicated Page: Developing a comprehensive article that defines "Foundational Black Americans" as a lineage, supported by reliable sources.
Ensuring Accuracy and Neutrality: Providing readers with accurate information that reflects the collective heritage and contributions of Foundational Black Americans without unintended bias.
Commitment to Wikipedia's Standards:
I am committed to adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines on neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing. My intention is to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia and enhance the quality of information available to the public.
Conclusion:
Thank you for considering my request. I believe that updating the page to accurately reflect the term will greatly benefit those seeking information on this important aspect of American history and culture.
I look forward to your response and the opportunity to contribute to this article. 2601:983:4600:7230:8D69:264C:225A:3C55 (talk) 23:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: I would like to request the unprotection of the Gangwar surname Wikipedia page. Currently, the page is semi-protected, which limits editing to more experienced editors, but this has hindered efforts to improve the page. The page lacks crucial information about the Gangwar clan and its historical background, including details from Vedic texts and other historical references.
As the Gangwar clan's history is deeply rooted in Vedic literature and other historical texts, it requires the expertise of scholars who are familiar with these sources to update the page. Normal editors may not fully grasp the significance of these references, and the semi-protection of the page could delay the process of incorporating the necessary academic and historical context.
It is important to include information about the Gangwar clan's regional distributions, its connections to other communities, and its role in historical events to improve the page’s accuracy and quality. Additionally, updating the page with proper citations and references from respected sources will greatly enhance the credibility of the article.
I respectfully request that the page be unprotected so that scholars and experts can contribute to the article and provide a more comprehensive and accurate account of the Gangwar surname and its historical context.
Thank you for your time and consideration. 4rju9 (talk) 04:20, 24 January 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.
The tile of this article should be changed from "October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel" to "October 7 Hamas-led Genocide on Israel".
There is numerous support for this change:
- On October 7, 2023, Hamas waged the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust — slaughtering babies, committing sexual violence, burning whole villages, and taking over 200 people hostage. In total, Hamas murdered over 1,000 Jews, in multiple locations.
- Various legal experts and genocide studies scholars argue that the 10/7 attack was a genocide as the victims were targeted for their Israeli-Jewish identity.
- A legal complaint that Hamas committed genocide on 10/7 is currently pending before the ICC.
- ICC issued arrest warrants for Hamas leaders alleging war crimes
- Hamas killed more Jews on 10/7 than any other massacre since the Holocaust.
- Hamas has made repeated statements of it's intent to eradicate the local Jewish population to reclaim "their land" both before and after 10/7 the attack. It was their stated intention for the attack to kill as many Israeli Jews as possible and steal their land.
- Hamas's previous governing charter including language that has been characterized as incitement to genocide and, according to several commentators, "mandates the killing of Jews".
- Hamas' official spokesperson promised to commit 10/7 "again and again and again."
- Hamas official stated that Hamas will carry out attacks over and over again "until Israel is annihilated"
- Various publications have called October 7 a "genocidal massacre"
The above is all supported by multiple sources. Here are some:
https://www.dw.com/en/october-7-hamas-attacks-on-israel-a-year-later/a-70399696
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/hamas-october-7-attack-repeat-israel-annihilated-ghazi-hamad/
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/honest-voice-israel
Apndrew (talk) 02:11, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Not done. This isn't an edit request, it's a move request (see WP:RM), and not the right place to discuss it. If you can find an extended confirmed editor who participates on the talk page who agrees that replacing "attack" with "genocide" would pass a WP:RM discussion, then go right ahead. I don't think it would pass, even if you find a few sources that refer to it this way, more can be found that refer to it as "attack". ~Anachronist (talk) 03:00, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.