Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase

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.

Requests for page protection
You are currently viewing the subpage "Current requests for increase in protection level". Return to Requests for page protection. Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level Request protection

Junglies

• Junglies (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: Persistent disruptive addition of unsourced content/content not in cited source. Waxworker (talk) 11:05, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. persistent maybe, but every few days or even weeks in between these edits isn't enough disruption to warrant protection. Lectonar (talk) 11:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

2024 missile strikes against Yemen

• 2024 missile strikes against Yemen (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Indefinite extended protection: Arbitration Enforcement. Abo Yemen✉ 12:53, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Question: Abo Yemen, what changed since your previous request about this a few hours ago? El_C 13:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh sorry i didn't see the previous one and nor did i get notified about it so i though that it might have been not sent (i used a gadget). Sorry again Abo Yemen✉ 13:04, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

No worries, Abo Yemen. If, however, you do see any contested or disruptive edits by non-WP:XC users that primarily concern WP:ARBPIA (a likely possibility), feel free to relist this request. I'll mark this as Withdrawn by requestor, for now. El_C 13:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Alright Abo Yemen✉ 13:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

2024 missile strikes in Yemen

• 2024 missile strikes in Yemen (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: Per WP:CT/A-I, this should be ECPd indefinitely. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 13:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Question: The Corvette ZR1, what changed since the previous request about this 30 minutes ago? El_C 13:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Prior requests notwithstanding, this does seem like something that clearly falls under ARBPIA broadly construed, as a military conflict originating as a response to fighting in Gaza. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Part of the earlier decline was that Israel was never mentioned in the article prose. The current article mentions the conflict many times, placing the missile strikes squarely within the context of the A-I conflict. I'd support protection. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Again, are there any contested or disruptive edits by non-WP:XC users that concerns WP:ARBPIA? That remains the question. If one wishes to move the goal posts and just go straight preemptive, that's different. El_C 14:55, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I would interpret WP:ARBECR B If a page (other than a "Talk:" page) mostly or entirely relates to the topic area, broadly construed, this restriction is preferably enforced through extended confirmed protection, though this is not required. as encouragement to apply the protection irrespective of the current state of editing. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

This is also my view, with a sprinkling in of WP:PP#Extended confirmed restriction's restatement of that point. Both emphasize the "not required", so I'm sympathetic to the practice of some admins of waiting until there's been clear disruption. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

While I have no strong opinion on this, here's a bit of institutional memory: about half a decade ago, after I preemptively protected ~100 ARBPIA primary articles, I was told to maybe not do that. There was a long drawn out discussion about it, where I was (and remain) neutral on, which is where a consensus among protecting admins was formed to not preemptively protect even DS/CT pages. At some point, ARBCOM was queried about this, because after all, then and now ARBECR wasn't that different in this respect. That committee's answer was... non-committal. Anyway, might be worth revisiting the question at WP:ARCA or elsewhere. El_C 15:19, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Ping @Lectonar: who I see is around right now and who was also around during that aforementioned discussion years ago. El_C 15:35, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Regardless of that matter, there's been too many moves, so I move-protected the page at admin level. El_C 15:00, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Let me ask you another question, @El C:. If Operation Prosperity Guardian, which is the same thing as the above article, can be ECPd, why can't this? The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 15:12, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Because, as I keep repeating, this page actually had contested or disruptive edits by non-WP:XC users. El_C 15:21, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I submitted an indef ECP for International sanctions during the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which fell under WP:GS/RUSUKR, and it was accepted, even though there was no persistent vandalism. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 15:27, 12 January 2024 (UTC) Useless argument, looked through the page history and there were quite a few instanceses of vandalism. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 15:31, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Admins' mileage varies. There's a few that nonetheless preemptively protect; most protecting admins at RfPP do not. El_C 15:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

There's a few that nonetheless preemptively protect. Is Daniel Case one of them? The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 15:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

No idea. El_C 15:48, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Sean O'Connor (Producer)

• Sean O'Connor (Producer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: Hello there, I have been having issues with the page written about my career. I have worked in the media for 35 years- most notably running The Archers for the BBC, as well as bringing the film director Terence Davies out of retirement after an absence of a decade. In that time I did spend a year at EastEnders. Over several months, some editors have been writing on my page with the intention of undermining my reputation. They use sources such as Digital Spy, The Sun or Hello to suggest that I was sacked because ratings were low and that I was accused of bullying. The Sun certainly made that accusation at the time, but this was proved to be absolutely untrue and I was paid damages and given a public apology. One editor insists on mentioning The Sun accusations- though carefully mentions the retraction. But this is clearly meant to indicate 'there's no smoke without fire.' At the same time the editor claims various cast members were critical of certain decisions. Yes, a former producer said he was 'sad' that some characters left- but he clearly knows this is just the natural churn of soap opera. Barbara Windsor did say that a decision was 'a mistake'- but she was ill at the time- as is now well known. The tone of these edits is malign and clearly made by a vindictive fan. Wikipedia is not an appropriate forum for such fan criticism as it is supposed to be an objective forum of factual information. This series of edits has been go on for so long now, I have found it extremely distressing. I feel that it is at least harassment and feels rather like bullying. So I'd like to request that this page be edited in fair terms by objective editors and then protected from fans who are less interested in the truth and simply have an axe to grind. Birkenhead01 (talk) 15:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC)