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: 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)
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)
Already protected by administrator Seraphimblade. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: IPs repeatitly vandalizing the article GoodDay (talk) 04:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary pending changes protection: Persistent disruptive editing. Recent repeated disruptive editing Cabrils (talk) 04:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:50, 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)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:51, 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)
- Declined Given that all of the extended-confirmed users are in favor of the current version while I wouldn't have done that protection this way if I were the responding admin the effect of increasing it to full would be to deny others the ability to edit while not obviously helping anything. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:53, 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)
- Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:54, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Wburrow (talk) 05:52, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:55, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent vandalism from a block evading IP range and sockpuppets, blocks seem to have no effect PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 06:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent vandalism from a block evading IP range and sockpuppets, blocks seem to have no effect PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 06:43, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Nixovel (talk) 06:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content. Donnowin1 (talk) 06:50, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- List of people granted executive clemency by Donald Trump (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. FactsheetPete (talk) 07:37, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Vandalism and revert-warring Sushidude21! (talk) 08:16, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection. HanTsî (talk) 08:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Nixovel (talk) 08:37, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Nixovel (talk) 08:40, 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)
- We do not entertain requests made via chatbot. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:36, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined per above. Daniel Case (talk) 07:00, 24 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)
- @4rju9: We do not entertain requests made via chatbot. Discuss it with Daniel Case, who protected it under the auspices of WP:GS/CASTE. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 06:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Daniel Case The page was semi-protected due to edit wars, which are no longer an issue. It needs updating to include historical information about the Gangwar clan, referenced in Vedic texts and historical sources. The page currently lacks information about the Gangwar clan, including historical context, regional distribution, and connections to other communities. Unprotection will allow me and the other scholars to contribute citations and improve the article’s quality and credibility.
- if possible, i would appreciate temporary unprotection or the opportunity to work collaboratively to improve the page.
4rju9 (talk) 07:33, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined
The page was semi-protected due to edit wars
- no, it wasn't, it was extended-confirmed protected instead.which are no longer an issue
- which means the protection is working. If you have a request for an edit to be made, use {{edit extended-protected}} on the talk page. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:48, 24 January 2025 (UTC)- the current page has zero historical information about the gangwar clan, and when i tried to add new information with all the source and vedic books. the editors continuously rejected the request even after me providing the sources. the extended-confirmed protected protection is limiting me to update the page. there are no reference nor any information it has basic information about their cast which is kurmi and no vedic information as mentioned in the books. they were part of so many wars and their relation with their ancestors is not mentioned nor the editors are allowing me to update. what is the solution of it. because when i share the historical references from vedic and historical books they are getting rejected.@Pppery @Daniel Case 4rju9 (talk) 08:05, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- so many historical and vedic information can be added to the aritcl but the editors are not putting any efforts in updating it or finding about it. nor letting anyone else to update it. 4rju9 (talk) 08:07, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Possible vandal bot attack. Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 06:01, 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 06:08, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Already protected by administrator Bilby. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:46, 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.
Change test runs scored from 1766 to 1798 Jaiswalgaurav012002 (talk) 07:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined This page is not protected. You can edit it yourself. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Change test Batting average from 55.18 to 52.88 Jaiswalgaurav012002 (talk) 07:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined This page is not protected. You can edit it yourself. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Change FC batting average from 64.03 to 62.40 Jaiswalgaurav012002 (talk) 07:40, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
- Declined This page is not protected. You can edit it yourself. * Pppery * it has begun... 07:46, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.