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 |
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: Political article that appears to have had biased information on it. Moreover, the article appears ripe for an edit war and paid writers on it could be possible. Holyapple25 (talk) 03:35, 19 September 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 03:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Over the last fortnight the page has been the subject of various attempts to introduce unsourced promo material "as directed by Dr.José-Alain Sahel" and "on Jose-Alain Sahel's request". Axad12 (talk) 06:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Lectonar (talk) 07:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- A quick question... Could you indicate for me where in the link provided it clarifies the level of disruptive activity required to justify protection. If so I will take this on board for future consideration. Many thanks, Axad12 (talk) 07:39, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Axad12: I would suggest starting with WP:PREEMPTIVE and WP:SEMI. The last disruptive edit was 6 days ago which is is not especially recent. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 07:51, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) In general, see our protection policy. But every case is different, and administrators may use their discretion on a case-by-case basis. See Bathos as an example for the level of disruption which has led to semi-protection, e.g. Lectonar (talk) 07:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- A quick question... Could you indicate for me where in the link provided it clarifies the level of disruptive activity required to justify protection. If so I will take this on board for future consideration. Many thanks, Axad12 (talk) 07:39, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent edit by sockpuppet. Ckfasdf (talk) 07:07, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Extended confirmed protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 07:44, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Block evasion by some IPs. Zach (talk to me) 08:08, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a period of 3 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Lectonar (talk) 08:37, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Reason: High level of IP vandalism in recent days. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Addition of unsourced content again and again by IPs and new user. M S Hassan 📬✍🏻 08:18, 19 September 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: I hope it can be pointed out on the discussion page that the explosive devices were not limited to Gold Apollo; devices from the well-known Japanese company Icom Incorporated also exploded. 58.152.168.150 (talk) 16:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Reason: "acts to promote awareness of Israel and the Middle East in the United Kingdom." is wholly misleading and accepts the purported purpose of the journal without quotes to indicate potential bias. The article has essentially no critique of what is a distinctly right-wing journal (IE: there is a major bias in the journal, regardless of left or right affiliation) except for an even more right-wing criticism. Given the clear bias and the unfinished nature of the page, it should really be opened up LordGigapiller (talk) 02:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
- If there is a reliable source for such a critique, please post it here. Daniel Case (talk) 03:57, 19 September 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.
Change the "mainly Hezbollah members" note on the casualties to "mainly civilians" as a large swath of Hezbollah casualties were apart of their political wing and considered civilians under international law, as well as ensuring the hundreds of medical staff who use pagers and were injured are not ignored. By simply stating that the majority of casualties were apart of Hezbollah, is suggests that the majority of casualties were non-civilian, which is inherently incorrect as stated above. It is imperative that this fact be clarified to prevent misinformation and further demonization of Lebanon.
Furthermore, it must be stated clearly and constantly that not only were the vast majority of the victims civilians, but that such an attack is, by definition and intent, a terror attack on Lebanon by israel (as israel has now confirmed they were behind it and had been planning it for an unspecified length of time). The severity of the attack in the context of international law must also be stated clearly as this is a clear violation of the Geneva Convention and general international law that protects civilians from attack and prohibits the use of terrorism a a legitimate manner of warfare.
For evidence to the above claims, see https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/9/18/israels-war-on-gaza-live-thousands-injured-in-lebanon-pager-explosions in which multiple quotes from israel, Hezbollah, the Lebanese Health Ministry, the UN, and various other third-parties with weight on the issue can be found and used to validate the above claims. Against the Empire (talk) 05:04, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.