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, 18 pending requests remain. (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
Line 11: Line 11:


== Current requests for increase in protection level ==
== Current requests for increase in protection level ==

=== [[GIC Deoria]] ===
* {{pagelinks|GIC_Deoria}}

'''Temporary semi-protection:''' Persistent disruptive editing from suspected socks. Not the first occurrence.
[[User:Sachin96700|Sachin96700]]([[User talk:Sachin96700|talk]]) 04:54, 23 December2019(UTC)


=== [[:Bepannah]] ===
=== [[:Bepannah]] ===

Revision as of 11:31, 23 December 2019

"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

    GIC Deoria

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing from suspected socks. Not the first occurrence. Sachin96700(talk) 04:54, 23 December2019(UTC)

    Bepannah

    Temporary extended confirmed: Persistent disruptive editing – There's been an edit war for a few days between an IP user (or several from the same range) and one autoconfirmed editor, hence I'm requesting ECP. Apparently the order in which the actors are listed is a Big Deal. bonadea contributions talk 10:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected by administrator Cyphoidbomb.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:04, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    It has been protected--Ymblanter (talk) 11:00, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Ed Jones (racing driver)

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing from suspected socks. Not the first occurrence. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 09:16, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 10 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:01, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Catchphrase (British game show)

    Temporary semi-protection: Repeated vandalism from the same IP user. Neverrainy (talk) 09:47, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Kannur International Airport

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. Sony R (talk) 17:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Justin Bieber

    Temporary extended confirmed: Persistent vandalism – way too many vandals. ∼∼∼∼ Eric0928Talk 17:11, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only two disruptive edits this week. Not an awful lot of clear vandalism this month either. Kosack (talk) 07:48, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Lee Robinson (footballer)

    Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. CLCStudent (talk) 17:31, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    SAI International School

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. CLCStudent (talk) 18:28, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    • Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 19:59, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Laura Kuenssberg

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. CLCStudent (talk) 19:25, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Nottamun Town

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of largely unsourced material by IP editor who will not engage on talkpageSvejk74 (talk) 19:36, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Hopes Die Last

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – IP hopper changing discography release years without sources. Jalen Folf (talk) 19:54, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Clémence Botino

    Temporary semi-protection: IP vandalism.BabbaQ (talk) 20:30, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Matthijs Otterloo

    Indefinite full protection: Persistent vandalism – Page keeps dealing with persistent vandalism, keeps getting nominated for speedy deletion (even though this has been declined a few times already) + fake information keeps being added with no sources. Platflyers (talk) 21:17, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Eleni Foureira

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Nationalist vandalism about her nationality. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 21:25, 22 December 2019 (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 21:30, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Youth Defence

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism going on for the last week or so. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:27, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Kings XI Punjab

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Dee03 22:00, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    William Greer

    Semi-protection: Lengthy semi protection please due to addition of unsourced or poorly sourced fringe conspiracy theory. Previously protected many times for this reason. 92.40.176.8 (talk) 22:10, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Robert Chuter

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Repeated unsourced COI violations spanning across eight years by multiple IP users, all which have every indication (IP Geo) that it's the subject itself, or someone closely related to the subject. Jay D. Easy (t • c) 22:13, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Doctor Who (series 12)

    Semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Constant unsourced/poorly sourced episode titles by IPs for popular upcoming season. -- /Alex/21 22:34, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Joshua Bassett (actor)

    Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Persistent unsourced DOB additions. Amaury • 23:06, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    List of Universal Pictures theatrical animated features

    Semi-protection: Persistent addition of fake films by IPs. Trivialist (talk) 01:25, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Halifax–Dartmouth Ferry Service

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent IP vandalism. Ben MacLeod (talk) 01:34, 23 December 2019 (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 01:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    It was denied because the IP was banned. So the user just jumped to another IP and vandalised the page again. Ben MacLeod (talk) 06:17, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. El_C 06:51, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    M-Flo

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – IP hopper repeatedly changing first line of summary without giving reason for edits. GimmeChoco44 (talk) 09:39, 23 December 2019 (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

    Bergen Belsen

    Reason: A redirect which was protected over a decade ago. Is the protection still necessary for the time being?102.156.71.151 (talk) 21:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Comment:: The redirect isn't protected. The target, however, is protected. The last time it was unprotected, it received no edits that weren't vandalism or reversion of vandalism before protection was reinstated. The time before that, it was hit 5 times in two days. Why give them the chance? - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 21:42, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am requesting a protection removal from the redirect only. I am not requesting an unprotection from the target page. I know what I am requesting. To be clear, I have visited the editing source of this redirect (not target) and noticed that it is limited for autoconfirmed users. Strangely enough, there isn't a clue in the protection log, except that its protection settings got moved from the target article.102.156.71.151 (talk) 21:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That is odd. I'm not seeing any current protection in the log, but the message is there. Then again, what reason is there to edit this anyway? To turn it into a disambiguation page? - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 23:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Then perhaps considering the redirect a deletion if its existence in WP is worthless?102.156.71.151 (talk)
    I'm not saying it's worthless. I'm saying I can't think of a reason to edit it. It's fine the way it is. - Sumanuil. (talk to me) 23:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, I am just realizing, if the same title with a hyphen instead of a space isn't protected, why this one is? The title with the hyphen received no edits ever since it got converted into a redirect by buidhe back in 2018.102.156.71.151 (talk) 23:54, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's protected because when a page is moved the redirect from the move has the same protection as its target. I see no point in unprotecting, though, so Declined * Pppery * it has begun... 03:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    baseball bat, cyanide, ultrasound and Yuri Gagarin

    Those articles have been indefinitely protected by a deceased user over a decade ago. Hopefully those WP:DEers are gone for good, well at least from some of the above pages.102.156.71.151 (talk) 21:56, 21 May 2024 (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


    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]
    Thanks for the reply, Kashmiri. I recognize the data is all coming from the same place. (I've tried to access but can't find a reliable site for the Gaza Health Ministry to find the data directly, so I assume the UN is accurately presenting the data.) I agree it hasn't changed the total number killed which is why I didn't suggest a change to that -- beyond fixing the "more than" to "nearly" 35,000. But I don't see any basis for keeping outdated numbers on women and children. The old ratio was 72% and the new ratio was 52%. The talk page suggests we need to wait for more RS, but at this point there are plenty:
    https://www.npr.org/2024/05/15/1251265727/un-gaza-death-toll-women-children
    https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/13/middleeast/death-toll-gaza-fatalities-un-intl-latam/index.html
    https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/gaza-women-children-death-toll-1.7203167
    Is there any way to flag this for the editors of that page, even on the Talk page? ConDissenter (talk) 23:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The text of the article has now gotten worse. It says "Since the start of the Israeli operation, more than 35,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed, including over 15,000 children and 10,000 women. Over 10,000 others are missing and presumed trapped under rubble." This implies either that there are 45,000 killed total, or ALL of the 25,000 identified are women and children. I've been following Talk:Israel–Hamas war on this subject and the contributors seem to be talking at loggerheads. How is this supposed to work? Now the text of the article is at odds with most RS. E.g., https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/what-we-know-about-the-death-toll-in-gaza/ar-BB1mzqUT. ConDissenter (talk) 23:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Create a level 3 header with a link to the article in question, then a {{pagelinks}} template and then the reason. It looks like this: Example (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) your request here. ~~~~

    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=932094417"