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 protection increases at the BOTTOM of this section. If you cannot find your request, check the archive of requests or, failing that, the page history. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Reason: Persistent disruptive editing – User keeps removing sourced content. Koshuri (グ) 11:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Temporary pending changes: Persistent disruptive editing – This is a new article which is substantially a duplicate of 2025 India–Pakistan strike. A redirect was established by consensus and an IP is repeatedly removing the redirect. There's the likelihood of partisan editing on this version. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- The Indian Armed Forces launched Operation Sindoor in the early hours of Wednesday in order to avenge the heinous Paahalgam attack. 2409:4085:2D8F:5433:8088:B9F6:A745:64AE (talk) 12:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Lot of misinformation being edited and potential vandalism SaNa Insights (talk) 13:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Requires longer protection as sockpuppet edits have continued less than a week after the previous protection expired. Katniss May the odds be ever in your favor ♥ 14:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There has been a pattern of consistent vandalism and unexplained deletion of most content (with refs) from the article (including today by an IP, that's still not reverted as of now). Khestwol (talk) 15:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Vandalism 46.117.160.63 (talk) 15:47, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. I don't see any vandalism. Sdrqaz (talk) 17:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Repeated changes to the infobox image by IP, partial copyright violations. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Which image is used is a content dispute; I don't see how it's a copyright violation (please ping on reply). Sdrqaz (talk) 17:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Full protection/pending changes: Content dispute/edit warring – Multiple content dispute and manual reverts, including removal of sourced content. A full protection for a small duration would be ideal, or pending changes. — Benison (Beni · talk) 17:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Full protection: Very recent topic seeing lots of IP visits. ☩ (Babysharkboss2) 17:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent long-term BLP violations by IP users. The page has been repeatedly protected over the last few years due to BLP violations, the most recent was for 1 year [1] Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:15, 7 May 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.
Unprotection: The protection was transfered. (CC) Tbhotch™ 18:08, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Comment:: The fact that this article started as a hijacked redirect to Pashtuns doesn't indicate that that would be a good idea. Sumanuil. (talk to me) 05:41, 7 May 2025 (UTC)- That doesn't seem relevant to me; it only indicates that the author wasn't careful enough. The protection is an artifact from it being created in the wrong place; since the location has been resolved, the protection should be too.
Unprotected. Sdrqaz (talk) 18:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- That doesn't seem relevant to me; it only indicates that the author wasn't careful enough. The protection is an artifact from it being created in the wrong place; since the location has been resolved, the protection should be too.
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – I am requesting that the protection level be lowered to semi-protection because reasonably qualified editors are getting shut out of the page. Our problems are mainly with the Ahir social group editors, who normally don't reach the semi-confirmed stage. Kautilya3 (talk) 05:25, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Daniel Case: protecting admin. This falls under Wikipedia:General sanctions/South Asian social groups, though. Lectonar (talk) 12:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Page has been protected since 2011. there has been little vandalism since, I think we can try downgrading to pending changes Filmssssssssssss (talk) 15:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Not done, not with a lengthy protection log that spanned nearly two years before it was indef-protected. That indicates the article is a vandalism magnet, in which case PCP does nothing but add extra work for reviewers. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Little to no vandalism since protection was implemented in 2009. I think it's worth trying pending changes for some time Filmssssssssssss (talk) 15:23, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- "Little to no vandalism" is not a reason to unprotect. That's circular reasoning. There's "little to no vandalism" because the protection is working as intended. Ask the protecting administrator Firsfron before asking here. There are good reasons why articles titled with common terms are indef-protected. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- The only way to know if protection is still needed is to see if disruption returns without the protection, so time having passed is a valid reason (though the common term issue is also a fair reason to be hesitant). Sdrqaz (talk) 18:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Reason: This page has been indefinitely semi-protected since 2017. The admin claimed "persistent vandalism", but it's been almost 8 years ago, that seems a bit excessive for a niche subject like this. 162.192.142.210 (talk) 17:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Reason: The information is incorrect and individuals are harming the name and writing wisimformation based on incorrect citations. Needs to be corrected or shut completely until repaired to factual. This is a serious liability. CHIEF HPD (talk) 17:45, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- Not unprotected – Please use an edit request to request specific changes to be made to the protected page. Talk:Jerry Speziale is not protected. Favonian (talk) 17:49, 7 May 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.
In the characters section, under Clementine, it says it says she befriended Caillou in the episode "Caillou Goes to Daycare", but under Leo it says he befriended Caillou in "Caillou at Daycare". please change the "Caillou at Daycare" to "Caillou Goes to Daycare" under Leo, because the name of the episode is "Caillou Goes to Daycare" not "Caillou at Daycare". and besides it is more consistent. I have kindly asked this before in the talk page on March 4, 2024, but no one responded and it annoyed me a lot. Please, if you do not want to change it, provide a reason why. 76.68.113.121 (talk) 05:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Change the word "autistic" with "with autism" Fatdogchuckie0123 (talk) 05:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.