Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Rpp)
"WP:RFP" and "WP:RPP" redirect here. You may also be looking for Wikipedia:Requests for permissions, Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission, or Wikipedia:Random page patrol.
    Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.
    Shortcuts

    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
    this header: view • edit



    Current requests for increase in protection level

    Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level
    Shortcuts

    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.


    Olympiacos F.C.

    Temporary extended protection: Persistent Vandalism. Lorry Gundersen (talk) 22:18, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Question: @Lorry Gundersen: Can you please point out specific recent edits that are vandalism and briefly explain why they are vandalism? And which ones are from autoconfirmed editors? Large portions of the article are unsourced so it is difficult to tell. Thanks. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 23:38, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: Other administrators: please feel free to resolve this as you see fit based on the response, especially if I take too long to respond. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 23:41, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Reactions to the Russian invasion of Ukraine

    Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Sanctioned topic - WP:RUSUKR. – Primium (talk) 04:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Prem Suri

    Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Disruption resumed within hours of expiry of the previous 1-week protection. As the disruption comes from new accounts that are already autoconfirmed, ECP protection might be necessary. — kashmīrī TALK 09:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Sigma male

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent vandalism or addition of poor quality content immediately after a protection expired. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 10:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Naushah Ganj Bakhsh

    Reason: Recently some unregistered user adding unsourced material without providing any proper sources without any reason so its request to increase the protection level of this particular article Syedmuhammadqadiri (talk) 10:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Last edit by an unregistered user more than 2 weeks ago. Lectonar (talk) 11:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Claudia Jessie

    Reason: Repeated BLP violation (i.e. addition of unsourced date of birth) by several IPs and also User:Pumpkin7135 GrindtXX (talk) 11:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    West Ferris Secondary School

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Article is attracting various promotional editors & vandals. Skywatcher68 (talk) 13:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Theresa McQueen

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent disuprtive editing, and long-term violation of MOS policy. livelikemusic (TALK!) 13:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • 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 13:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Rhodesia

    Pending changes: Persistent disruptive editing – Several NPOV violations and vandalism cases. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 14:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Jenna Ellis

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. FMSky (talk) 14:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level
    Shortcuts

    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.

    Shortcuts

    Draft:Lifespan Integration

    Reason: Full creation protection seems unjustified. The corresponding mainspace page is unprotected and no one has recreated it. I personally do not intend to create an article on this topic but in case an autoconfirmed editor does, it would be reasonable to drop the SALT level to semi to match mainspace. Protecting admin has been desysoped so I brought it here directly. Nickps (talk) 11:54, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Nickps: The SALT does seem justifiable, given three speedy deletions. I do agree with you that full-protection is unnecessary for it, however. Semi-protection would seem to me to be too low; maybe XCP? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:44, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Even that sounds wrong to me to be honest. Protecting the draft but not the mainspace article is a weird thing to do. It's essentially directing any spam to mainspace. Since there has been no such spam all this time, I'd argue that the protection has outlived its purpose. But, lowering the protection would still be a positive in any case so I won't get too hung up on the level. Do XCP if you think it's right. Nickps (talk) 16:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It doesn't look like there's been any attempt to re-create the mainspace page after the AfD (which, I should note, post-dates the most recent draft deletion). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:33, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Meh This is one of those cases who pop up from time to time where I am always on the fence. Yes, the page shouldn't be protected anymore (or only at lower level); on the other hand there is no expressed need to create a page under said draft. Lectonar (talk) 07:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Request a specific edit to a protected page
    Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
    Shortcut

    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.
    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests


    Israel–Hamas war

    Change "Since the start of the Israeli operation, more than 35,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed,[86] including over 15,000 children and 10,000 women.[87][88]" to "Since the start of the Israeli operation, nearly 35,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed,[86] including over 7,000 children and nearly 5,000 women.[87][88]." This is based on the data recently revised by the UN, accessible here: https://www.ochaopt.org/content/hostilities-gaza-strip-and-israel-reported-impact-day-215. ConDissenter (talk) 21:21, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Is there another place to request this change? The talk page for Israel-Hamas war is restricted as well. The current source for casualty data is palinfo.com, which describes itself by saying it "does not lay any claim to neutrality for it blatantly sides with the oppressed Palestinian people." https://english.palinfo.com/about-us/. Recognizing that reliable sources do not need to have a neutral POV, why should we use this as a source rather than a less biased source like the United Nations? ConDissenter (talk) 18:28, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @ConDissenter Please go check Talk:Israel–Hamas war for earlier discussions and to see why your request is unlikely to succeed. FYI, the lower numbers refer not to the killed overall but to the killed who have additionally been identified by name. Besides, all the numbers are sourced to Gaza MoH anyway. — kashmīrī TALK 09:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Israel–Hamas war

    The death toll statistics are presented in an imbalanced way. Include the israeli statistics for the palestinian casualties. Egaga1 (talk) 06:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Handled requests

    A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=1224236039"