Wikipedia:Requests for page protection
 | This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared. |
| 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 |
Current requests for increase in protection level
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.
Reason: Long term abuse (WP:LTA and WP:EVADE) from a blocked sock-puppet Mikemikev who has been using dozens of accounts going back over 12 years to leave often abusive and disruptive messages on the talk-page. His most recent account has been blocked (check the SPI [1]) but this user creates a new account every few months and uses the talk-page again. Examples of previous blocked socks exclusively using the talk-page to attack other users and cause disruption: Richard Calthrope, Bogestra Bob, Verena Boddenberg, Alan B. Samuels, Cheesecake Denier, Badger Farmer, Redundant Farmhand, Pant Wrangler, Beet Farmer, Retired Farmer, Mbutu Collins, Essentially Dave, Von Clown, David Smyth5, Rupert the Frog, Dave Davidson, Peasant in Suit, BanjoBruce.
This is a form of long-term abuse that has been happening for over 12 years. I believe there should be stronger protection. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm just piping up to say I strongly support this request, and I imagine that many or most of those who watch the page will agree. This talk page is an especially frequent target for time-wasting LTAs such as Mikemikev, as well as soapbox diatribes by IPs. The same thing was done over at Talk:Race and intelligence and the tenor of the conversation improved immediately. Generalrelative (talk) 23:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Dennis Brown: You semi-protected Talk:Race and intelligence in December 2021. Do you think protection is required at Talk:Race (human categorization)? I support that but would like another opinion. If you agree, please protect. Johnuniq (talk) 08:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've not been very active lately, although I do try to log on and follow up on requests like this. After reviewing the logs and considering the topic, it is my opinion that the talk page should be indef semi-protected. There are certain topics that simply attract a type of bias that isn't seasonal, and will likely outlive us all, and this article seems to have been abused enough, and it overlaps Race and intelligence enough to justify the protection. From my perspective, we owe it to the editors to provide a reasonable environment to improve the articles. Rarely is this type of protection uses, for good reason, but we shouldn't be afraid to use the tools when the benefit to everyone is many times greater than the inconvenience to a few. Anyone that has a sincere desire to participate in either article only has to make a simple request for edit, or make a few edits and wait 4 days. This is a low bar, and I don't see how this minor limitation will hurt the reader, who is our primary concern. Because I'm less active, I would prefer a more active admin protect, but I will if others are not comfortable doing so. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 11:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I went ahead and protected, but may be slow to respond if there are questions about it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 13:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've not been very active lately, although I do try to log on and follow up on requests like this. After reviewing the logs and considering the topic, it is my opinion that the talk page should be indef semi-protected. There are certain topics that simply attract a type of bias that isn't seasonal, and will likely outlive us all, and this article seems to have been abused enough, and it overlaps Race and intelligence enough to justify the protection. From my perspective, we owe it to the editors to provide a reasonable environment to improve the articles. Rarely is this type of protection uses, for good reason, but we shouldn't be afraid to use the tools when the benefit to everyone is many times greater than the inconvenience to a few. Anyone that has a sincere desire to participate in either article only has to make a simple request for edit, or make a few edits and wait 4 days. This is a low bar, and I don't see how this minor limitation will hurt the reader, who is our primary concern. Because I'm less active, I would prefer a more active admin protect, but I will if others are not comfortable doing so. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 11:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Already protected by administrator Dennis Brown. For the bot. Favonian (talk) 14:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Requesting temporary page protection to maintain stability while we build consensus on the talk page.
Significant changes were made despite open discussions with no consensus, introducing new sources and altering the article’s scope. I reverted these changes to the stable version ([2]) and invited the editors to continue discussing the individual sources, which is where the conversation was left before the changes.
To prevent potential edit warring and ensure constructive collaboration, temporary protection would help maintain stability while we work toward consensus on the talk page. Qono (talk) 03:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – Might fall under WP:RUSUKR. EditorGirlAL07 (talk) 07:22, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Note: It likely does fall under RUSUKR but looking at the page history I don't think protection is needed. I'll leave this open in case an admin wants to protect. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:42, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – WP:PIA. EditorGirlAL07 (talk) 07:24, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Previous autoconfirmed protection hasn't been helpful, requesting temporary ECP to prevent a possible edit war, user has modified other articles as well, often removing sources/content. Some examples here [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] Sir Calculus (talk) 11:54, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Requesting semi-protection for the Ram Pothineni page to prevent repeated vandalism. Despite multiple undo attempts, deliberate edits from IP addresses persist. MySlack1222 (talk) 13:30, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Armenian section is being vandalised by unconfirmed accounts Athoremmes (talk) 13:30, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Vandalism, addition of unsourced content, etc. Sparkbean (talk) 13:34, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Disrupitve editing: A study by the University of Granada has apparently revealed that Christopher Columbus was a Sephardic Jew and not a Genoese. This has been questioned and is still being discussed. However, several editors have changed the article saying he was a Sephardic Jew and completely ignoring the discussion on the talk page. This has already happened at least 10 times since October 13. RobertJohnson35 (talk) 13:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Fully protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Aintabli (talk) 13:57, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
User(s) blocked. Already blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Aintabli (talk) 13:57, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- User(s) blocked. Already blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Aintabli (talk) 13:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- User(s) blocked. Already blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Aintabli (talk) 13:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- User(s) blocked. Already blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Aintabli (talk) 13:58, 14 October 2024 (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 14:02, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- User(s) blocked. Already blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Extended confirmed or full protection: Edit warring. 96.56.133.246 (talk) 14:39, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Protection isn't necessary for issues with single users. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
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.
Reason: (Redacted) They have been trying to take gays against groomers down all over social media, and it really did a lot of damage. Gays against groomers isn’t far right at all. 2603:9001:1BF0:20B0:BDBB:A334:508C:7116 (talk) 07:30, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, this is not the place to contest ARBCOM actions. And maybe try giving an actual policy-related reason? - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 07:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- This protection was done under the auspices of a contentious topic and cannot be unilaterally reversed here. Start by asking El C (talk · contribs) if they are willing to revisit the protection; if not you must appeal at WP:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement or WP:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. I will tell you that if your appeals elsewhere are along the lines of what's written above (including and ESPECIALLY the rather extreme personal attacks), then they will be rejected out-of-hand. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 08:20, 14 October 2024 (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.
My suggestion is to leave out the following 2 sentences in the "German complicity" paragraph as they seem to be based on misunderstandings:
"She also highlighted police suppression of pro-Palestine protests throughout Germany[509] as evidence of state complicity.[508] Karen Wells et al. highlight how Germany has entrenched its complicity in Israel's actions by banning use of the word "genocide" in reference to Israel.[471][better source needed]"
1. In general violent protests are not allowed in Germany. As some of the first pro-Palestine protests were violent, they were sometimes forbidden by courts, if they were expected to turn violent. But that is common policy in Gemany with all subjects and not special for pro-Palestine protests.
Meanwhile, there even is a calendar concerning pro-Palestinian protests[8] with daily up to 20 protests all over Germany. Thus, there is no general police suppression of pro-Palestine protests as is suggested by the current wording.
2. The word “genocide” is not banned in reference to Israel in Germany - maybe that was a misunderstanding: What is not allowed in Germany is to call for genocide against Jews. The slogan “From the river to the sea” is seen as such call and banned. Gilbert04 (talk) 15:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
Consider changing "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations, and accused the court of being antisemitic, which it often does when criticised" to "The Israeli government has been accused of consistently weaponizing antisemitism against it's critics, including in the ICJ ruling." Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- The Weaponization of antisemitism page hyperlinked over "often done" has many sources to draw from regarding the accusations' consistency and nature.
- My main concern with the original text is that it's voiced as if it's an observation made by a Wikipedian. The benefit here is that the weaponization of antisemitism has a clearer consistency grounded outside of Wikipedia. Perhaps other ways to word this out include adding a time scale (increasingly accused since Oct. 7th) or specifying the critique (against critiques of their actions since Oct 7th).
- If a lead paragraph change is necessary, there may be reason to outline Israeli motives and conditions for the genocide, including Zionism and anti-Arab racism. Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
"was a Sephardic Jewish[4] explorer" to "was an Italian explorer" 80.235.211.34 (talk) 13:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Not done – The article has been fully protected for two weeks in a version with Genoa as his city of origin. What happens in the long run will be settled at Talk:Christopher Columbus. Favonian (talk) 14:42, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.