Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Bot clerking, archiving 3 threads, 32 pending requests remain. (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 155: Line 155:
* {{pagelinks| Tom & Jerry (2021 film)}}
* {{pagelinks| Tom & Jerry (2021 film)}}
'''Semi-protection:''' High level of IP vandalism. This has a, dedicated, fanbase and they’re removing sourced material with often unsourced opinions/praise. Constant need to revert. [[User:TropicAces|TropicAces]] ([[User talk:TropicAces|talk]]) 03:16, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
'''Semi-protection:''' High level of IP vandalism. This has a, dedicated, fanbase and they’re removing sourced material with often unsourced opinions/praise. Constant need to revert. [[User:TropicAces|TropicAces]] ([[User talk:TropicAces|talk]]) 03:16, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
:{{ping|TropicAces}} Many of IP edits are constructive. I don't any effort to vandalise the page. [[Special:Contributions/36.76.234.82|36.76.234.82]] ([[User talk:36.76.234.82|talk]]) 04:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)


=== [[:Talk:Login]] ===
=== [[:Talk:Login]] ===

Revision as of 04:40, 28 February 2021

"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

    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.

    Roxanna Bina

    Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Article has been repeatedly recreated since 2009. All deletions of it were via PROD, XFD or CSD. Cupper52 (talk) 09:52, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Cupper52, Can you show me more evidence? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Roxanna+Bina only shows two deletion entries. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:52, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Ritchie333 See User talk:Roxybina. -Cupper52Discuss! 08:58, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks like a request for speedy deletion was made in 2009 and declined: "downgrade speedy to notability as significance has been asserted". The page was deleted in 2020 via PROD and in 2021 via AfD. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Domantas Sabonis

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. User:Namiba 02:12, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    The article is under pending changes protection, and all edits for the last weel have been accepted. I do not see any recent unreverted vandalism.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Persistent sockpuppetry by User:RawalJaisal

    Temporary semi-protection: Blocked account User:RawalJaisal keeps restoring their edits through an IP. They're clearly the same individual since both have provided the same phone number to be contacted with.[1][2]
    Alivardi (talk) 09:37, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Template:Pyawbwe Township

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – List of red links with no reasonable chance of ever becoming an article. Bot created. The Banner talk 10:32, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Too Hot (Jason Derulo song)

    Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry from sockpuppets of two blocked editors, one of whom remains unblocked, as reported here [3]. IP of a now-blocked range restored the page, and a sock account of BlaccCrab—known for having accounts geolocating to Maryland, US—has reverted on the page twice to attempt to redirect it (November 2020, earlier today). Ss112 10:37, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    The Conjuring

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent Vandalism. Poppified talk 14:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Antagonist

    Indefinite pending changes: Persistent disruptive editing – Long-time recurrence of disruptive edits (protected four times in the past year) from IP addresses by a permanently blocked user. See the archive at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Drewpalazzolo for more background. Largoplazo (talk) 16:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    GameStop short squeeze

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 17:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Rose City Antifa

    Semi-protection: Vandal magnet, what amounts to the parent article at Antifa (United States) is semi-protected indefinitely. FDW777 (talk) 17:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Kuruluş: Osman characters

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – There are a whole lot of IPs removing the exact same content, leaving behind the exact same edit summaries, however, their IP addresses seem to be, although similar, different. It's already been protected 2 times and the exact same day protection was removed, IPs started removing content, making unconstructive edits and maybe even vandalising. Limorina (talk) 17:16, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Televisão Pública de Angola

    Temporary pending changes: Persistent disruptive editing – It's impossible to range block this guy. (CC) Tbhotch™ 17:53, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Frank Lovece

    Temporary full protection: Repeated WP:OUTING attempts based on claims by banned User:Hillbillyholiday and denied by article subject.--Tenebrae (talk) 18:55, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Pascal Gaüzère

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – I know it's unorthodox to protect a talkpage, but there's many BLP violations on there, after a controversial match today. Hopefully 12-24 hours of talkpage protection will dissuade those who want to use the talkpage to complain about him. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Pentagon UFO videos

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring. Eridian314 (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Nick Fuentes

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from new and IP users removing reliably sourced content/whitewashing extremism. Nmi628 (talk) 20:46, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Zamfara kidnapping

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ITN article. Pahunkat (talk) 21:40, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Akhtar Raza Khan

    Indefinite pending changes: High level of IP vandalism over a long period of with image persistently being removed by anon. IP user(s) seemingly obsessed with removing fair use image. If not indefinite needs to be very very long.Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:42, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism from new and IP users. Mitchumch (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    List of programs broadcast by TeenNick

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP users adding Preschool content. kpgamingz (rant me) 21:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Ivo Andrić

    Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent vandalism. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 22:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Somesh

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP has been trying to convert it into a ?COI? article about someone of dubious notability. Le Deluge (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    War crimes in the Kosovo War

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Souliotes

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 23:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Parramatta Eels players

    Semi-protection: Page has been changed away from source approximately 50 times. Very hard to discuss as almost always changed by a series of anon IPs. When attempting to discuss on the talk page, talk was also deleted by the same IPs. Doctorhawkes (talk) 00:21, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Exclamation mark

    Temporary pending changes: Persistent vandalism. Wretchskull (talk) 00:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Mustang

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Maybe needs pending changes protection. Every time semi goes off, the nonsense edits begin. Montanabw(talk) 01:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Hebrew language

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent Vandalism. Sir Joseph (talk) 02:12, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Ion Plus & Qubo

    Temporary full protection: As seems to happen every time a television channel closes (especially children's channels such as Qubo is), IPs and low-edit accounts (along with other AC accounts who seem to exist only to claim 'dibs' on marking a network death) are coming in to claim the networks have closed using poorly-shot YouTube videos of their televisions showing a 'channel no longer exists' screen as 'proof' (when their cable provider merely removed it because it's a dead channel). Editing restoration on Monday morning (when they will be confirmed as off the air) should hold this off until then. Nate • (chatter) 02:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Tom & Jerry (2021 film)

    Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. This has a, dedicated, fanbase and they’re removing sourced material with often unsourced opinions/praise. Constant need to revert. TropicAces (talk) 03:16, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @TropicAces: Many of IP edits are constructive. I don't any effort to vandalise the page. 36.76.234.82 (talk) 04:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:Login

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent Vandalism. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of two weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Surprising how much attention that page gets. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 04:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. Looks to be on someone's list as a test page. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    They certainly find their way there. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 04:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Bulloch Academy

    Temporary semi-protection: or longer. Persistent vandalism, returns whenever the article is unprotected. Determined whitewashing of history by local residents. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:25, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in 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

    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

    Hurricane Helene

    Reason: Looking through the history indicates the main edit wars are IP vs EC editors, not EC vs EC. Can this article please be downgraded from full administrative protection to EC protection? I believe protection skipped EC protection and was set straight to administration protection, despite it being edit wars from IP vs EC editors. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Manan Shah

    Unprotection: Hello , this page has been deleted seven times.After seventh time deletion this page got salted.The page was last deleted on 10th November 2015.So I am requesting to unprotect this page so that i can create this page.Thank you. Bapinghosh (talk) 08:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Make a draft page first. However, note the draft page has been deleted various times as well. – The Grid (talk) 23:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Brexit Party

    Unprotection: Requesting move-protection be lifted as the RfC has now concluded and the decision has been made to rename this article. Link here. — Czello 22:34, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests
    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.
    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


    Gaza genocide

    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[4] 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)[reply]

    @FortunateSons: A quick browse shows at least for the first part support for removal, can you add any additional incite? -- Cdjp1 (talk) 12:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I can confirm that both statements are broadly true. IMO, the best resource for this discussion (in the contemporary context) is probably Steinberg: Versammlungsfreiheit nach dem 7. Oktober - NVwZ 2024, 302. Direct citation: “Die Subsumtion unter diesen Tatbestand bereitet aber auch sonst Probleme. Die Stadt Frankfurt a. M. hatte dem Anmelder einer Versammlung „Frieden in Nahost" am 2.12.2023 untersagt, während der Versammlung zur Vernichtung Israels aufzurufen, dem Staat Israel das Existenzrecht abzusprechen, sowie die Aussagen „Israel Kindermörder", „Juden Kindermörder", „Israel bringt Kinder um" sowie „From the river to the sea" zu tätigen. Diese Beschränkungen hob das VG Frankfurt vollständig auf. Auf die Beschwerde der Stadt differenzierte der VGH Kassel Aufrufe zur Vernichtung Israels verstießen - wie gesagt - gegen § 111 StGB und die Aussage „Juden Kindermörder" erfülle den Tatbestand der Volksverhetzung (§ 130 StGB). Demgegenüber wurden andere Außerungen wie „Kindermörder Israel" oder die Bezeichnung der israelischen Militäroperationen in Gaza als „Genozid" nicht beanstandet und die Entscheidung des VG insoweit aufrechterhalten. Es sei davon auszugehen, dass bei den militärischen Verteidigungshandlungen Israels auch Kinder zu Schaden kämen. Eine solche laienhafte Zuspitzung sei im Rahmen der Meinungsfreiheit hinzunehmen. Anders hatte der VGH Mannheim am 21.10.2023 ein Verbot der Parole „Israel Kindermörder" und „Israel bringt Kinder um" durch die Versammlungsbehörde trotz bestehender Zweifel über deren Strafbarkeit aufrechterhalten; im Verfahren des vorläufigen Rechtsschutzes sei nur eine summarische Prüfung möglich; eine einmal getätigte Äußerung könne nicht rückgängig gemacht werden. Die Unterscheidung zwischen antisemitisch und antiisraelisch stellt sicherlich eine Gratwanderung dar, die hier im Einzelnen nicht beschrieben werden kann“autotranslated: “However, the subsumption under this offense also causes other problems. On December 2, 2023, the city of Frankfurt am Main had prohibited the person registering a meeting "Peace in the Middle East" from calling for the destruction of Israel during the meeting, from denying the State of Israel the right to exist, and from making the statements "Israel, child murderer," "Jews, child murderer," "Israel kills children" and "From the river to the sea." The Administrative Court of Frankfurt completely lifted these restrictions. In response to the city's complaint, the Administrative Court of Kassel differentiated that calls for the destruction of Israel violated - as mentioned - Section 111 of the Criminal Code and that the statement "Jews, child murderer" constituted incitement to hatred (Section 130 of the Criminal Code). In contrast, other statements such as "Israel, child murderer" or the description of Israeli military operations in Gaza as "genocide" were not objected to and the Administrative Court's decision was upheld in this respect. It can be assumed that children would also be harmed in Israel's military defense actions. Such a lay exaggeration must be accepted within the framework of freedom of expression. On October 21, 2023, the Mannheim Higher Administrative Court upheld a ban on the slogans "Israel, child murderer" and "Israel kills children" by the assembly authority despite existing doubts about their criminal liability; in the interim legal protection procedure, only a summary examination is possible; a statement once made cannot be reversed. The distinction between anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli is certainly a balancing act that cannot be described in detail here.” There is no broad ban on pro-Palestinian protests either, and they were even allowed to happen on Oct. 7 of this year (in some cases). While there are legal disputes on specifics for both, I’m pretty confident that no reasonable person would disagree with “broadly permitted” regarding both claims. FortunateSons (talk) 16:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Bonus: there can be cases where something isn’t criminal, but can be restricted in other ways, for example due to different burdens of proof or social pressures. FortunateSons (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've removed #2. But there does seem to be evidence that pro-Palestine protests have been banned in parts of Germany at times.[5][6][7].VR (Please ping on reply) 14:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. Maybe the following article gives a bit more clarity.[[8]] Gilbert04 (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Unfortunately that source seems incomplete. Germany has indeed suppressed peaceful criticism of Israel.[9] And Washington Post says "A planned photo exhibit in southwestern Germany was canceled as a result of social media posts by its curator, including one describing “genocide” in Gaza."[10] VR (Please ping on reply) 22:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I do not think that any source will ever be complete. Let me add two more.[[11]][[12]] Gilbert04 (talk) 20:44, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Gaza genocide 2

    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)[reply]

    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)[reply]
    @Ecco2kstan, how about: "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations. Supporters of Israel say that accusing Israel of genocide is both antisemitic[13][14] and a form of Holocaust erasure[15], but others argue antisemitism shouldn't be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations.[16][17][18][19]".VR (Please ping on reply) 00:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not as familiar with the Holocaust erasure claims, but I'm happy with that reworking! If that weaponization of Holocaust denial detail isn't on the weaponization of antisemitism page already, it might be a worthwhile phenomenon incorporate if there's more citations you can find. I might look into it myself. Thanks! Ecco2kstan (talk) 03:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That does sound quite balanced. +1 from me. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vice regent: Would you please make this change, so we can close this request? ~Anachronist (talk) 21:28, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The text I originally wanted modified was changed to "Israel's supporters say that accusing Israel of genocide is antisemitic, but others argue antisemitism should not be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations" after other discussions on the talk page. I almost like it better, but by saying "Israel's supporters" it relieves some of the responsibility from the Israeli government in the accusations that was, to an extent, duly credited in the original modification. Maybe now, it should just say "The Israeli government and their supporters say that accusing the state for genocide antisemitic..." or something similar. Ecco2kstan (talk) 17:39, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Gaza genocide

    The 70% figure in both the primary and the secondary source refers to the deaths that were verified by the UN Human Rights Office, not the totality of deaths in Gaza.

    Accordingly, the current phrasing "70% of Palestinian deaths in Gaza are women and children" is inaccurate and should be changed to "70% of the 8,119 verified deaths were women and children" Zlmark (talk) 06:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    List of highest-grossing Indian films

    in the content, higehst grossing franchises, rank 4 (Cop Universe), in that one, the movie Singham Returns (2014) is highlighted in green which indicates it is a recent movie, but actually the movie Singham Again (2024) should be highlighted in green because unlike Singham Returns, it is a recent movie, it has wrongly been marked, kindly correct it. Thanks :) Zev the Editor (talk) 16:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Two-state solution

    I would like to request the addition of the following paragraph on Singapore’s support for a two-state solution under the section "International Positions on the Two-State Solution" in the Two-state solution article:

    International Positions on the Two-State Solution

    Singapore: Singapore supports a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, advocating for a negotiated outcome aligned with relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. According to Singapore’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Singapore believes this approach allows Israelis and Palestinians to coexist peacefully and securely, considering it the only viable path toward a comprehensive, just, and lasting resolution. Singapore also consistently upholds the Palestinian right to a homeland. The PLO, which constitutes the key pillar of the current Palestinian Authority, accepts Israel's right to exist and has renounced terrorism.[1]

    EsenL (talk) 02:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    1. ^ "Reply to Parliamentary Question on Palestine". Retrieved 2024-11-12.
    Source? Providing a source to back up your edit drastically improves the chance it'll be done. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 02:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    have added! thanks! EsenL (talk) 02:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Bengalis

    I would like to request that... (1. According to 2023 estimates the USA has 453,191 speakers.[1]
    2. According to 2021 census, Canadas has 120,600 speakers[2].
    3. According to 2021 census, Nepal has 23,774 speakers.) . 106.221.114.2 (talk) 03:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    1. ^ https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDT1Y2023.B16001?q=bengali&hidePreview=false&vintage=2018
    2. ^ https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=9810021701

    Gaza genocide

    In the "Indirect" section, the following sentence should be added after "186,000 or even more deaths could be attributable to the current conflict in Gaza":

    Three days after the publication, one of the writers, Professor Martin McKee, clarified that the 186,000 figure was “purely illustrative” and stated that “our piece has been greatly misquoted and misinterpreted.”

    Source: "'186,000 Gazans dead': Lancet magazine publishes new blood libel". The Jerusalem Post. July 9, 2024. 


    Zlmark (talk) 16:26, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Create a level 3 header with a link to the article in question, then a {{pagelinks}} template and then the reason.

    wiki sandbox

    Handled requests

    A rolling archive of the last seven days of protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Rolling archive.

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&oldid=1009360623"