Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:RPP)
Jump to: navigation, search
"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.
Requests for page protection

This page is for requesting that a page, file or template be fully protected, create protected (salted), semi-protected, added to pending changes, move-protected, template protected (template-specific), upload protected (file-specific), or unprotected. Please read up on 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 only to prevent IP and new user vandalism (see the rough guide to semi-protection), and move protection is used to stop pagemove revert wars.

After a page has been protected, the protection is listed in the page history and logs with a short description indicating why it was protected, and the article is listed on Special:Protectedpages. Further discussion should take place on the Talk page of the article. In the case of full protection due to edit warring, admins do not revert to specific versions of the page, except to get rid of obvious vandalism.


If you would like to request a page to be protected or unprotected, please follow the following steps:

  1. If you are requesting unprotection, you must ask the protecting administrator first for unprotection. If the admin is unable to respond and/or lower protection then you can list your request on this page.
  2. Add a level 3 header (i.e. === [[Example title]] ===) with the namespace if not an article. Place your request at the bottom of either the protection or unprotection list, depending on the nature of your request, and place the pagelinks template below the header in the form of * {{pagelinks|Example title}}. Please make sure you have spelled the name of the article properly; a common error stems from mistaken requests for the protection of redirects, particularly capitalised ones.
  3. If you are requesting protection, write the type of request (full protection, semi-protection, pending changes, move protection) and a brief reason for your request below your header.
  4. Please do not add arbitrary requests for a protection expiry time to your request, or request indefinite protection arbitrarily.
    • If there is a reason for a page to be protected for a certain amount of time, such as protecting a user talk page until the user is unblocked, please make this clear.
    • If you are requesting indefinite semi-protection or pending changes, be aware that it is only applied to articles with endemic and endless vandalism problems which multiple increasing periods of temporary semi-protection or pending changes have failed to stop.
    • Note that different expiry times can be set for edit and move-protections, so an article can, for example, be semi-edit-protected for a week and full-move-protected indefinitely.
  5. Sign your request with four tildes ~~~~ and save.
  • Note: this is not a venue for continuing an argument from elsewhere nor starting a new discussion regarding content. If a request contains excessive arguing, is being used for edit-warring or content disputes, contains personal attacks or uncivil comments or any other unrelated discussion, it will be removed from this page.
For single page requests
=== [[Example Article Name]] ===
* {{pagelinks|Example Article Name}}
'''Semi-protection:''' High level of IP vandalism. ~~~~
=== [[Template:Example Template Name]] ===
* {{pagelinks|Template:Example Template Name}}
'''Unprotection:''' From full protection to template editor protection. ~~~~
For multiple page requests with the same criteria
=== Short descriptive header ===
* {{pagelinks|Wikipedia:Example Page Name 1}}
* {{pagelinks|Wikipedia:Example Page Name 2}}
'''Temporary semi-protection:''' High level of IP vandalism. ~~~~
Feed-icon.svg You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

Administrator instructions

Current requests for increase in protection level[edit]

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 rolling 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.

Arabian horse[edit]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The only new accounts or IPs to edit this article are vandals or the promoters of "magic unicorn horses." Waste of editor resources to be babysitting this article. Montanabw(talk) 23:45, 9 February 2016 (UTC)


Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Another horse breed article plagued by IP and new accounts either vandalizing or promoting "magic unicorn horses" Featured Article, too. Editors have other things to do than vandal patrol on this one, please. Montanabw(talk) 23:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

2015–16 Montreal Canadiens season[edit]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – IPs, maybe around 4 of them, are adding unsourced scores. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} 03:24, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

So Fresh: The Hits of Summer 2016[edit]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continuous blanking of page, and addition of unrelated content by multiple IPs. ilovechristianmusic (Tell Me Something!) 03:30, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Ted Nugent[edit]

Indefinite semi-protection: BLP policy violations. Mlpearc (open channel) 04:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Turing Pharmaceuticals[edit]

Semi-protection: High level of vandalism. 2605:6000:8B43:5B00:6C53:D634:9559:60C2 (talk) 04:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Current requests for reduction in protection level[edit]

Please post requests in this section for removing or reducing the protection level of a page if the protecting admin is inactive or you have already asked them.
  • To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "View 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 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 here if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

Shalom Television[edit]

Unprotection: The channel received significant coverages. Requesting an un-salt for the page. . SuperHero👊 08:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Note: Have a look on these coverages [1], [2], [3] and [4] on several Catholic news portals. SuperHero👊 09:18, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Please contact User:Master of Puppets, the admin who deleted and salted the last version (if you have not done so already). Lectonar (talk) 10:58, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Also, the chances of unprotecting are greater if there's a draft article ready to move into place. There might be some sourcing but it still needs to stand as an article. tutterMouse (talk) 12:54, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
I know because the article passes the guideline criteria (an article must have received "significant coverage" in reliable sources that are independent of the subject). Probably, i had contacted the salting admin for this matter. SuperHero👊 13:06, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
I have several reservations about this that I've detailed on my talk page. m.o.p 17:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Current requests for edits to a protected page[edit]

Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.

Donald Trump[edit]

Edit semi-protected: The header states that he " among working-class voters, as well as widespread opposition from Hispanics/Latinos, Muslims, business leaders, and other Republicans," but does not cite a source. This is not the language used later on in the article where it says "...earned him support among working-class voters and voters without college educations amid heavy and frequent controversies in the news media." I think it's unfair to paint him in this way without at least citing a source because potential voters of those groups may read the header and get an impression of him without actually looking into his positions for themselves. My request or suggestion is to change the language in the header to what is said later in the article (which is cited), or cite a source for the original claims. WikiUser2244 (talk) 01:02, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

{{RFPP|no}} No specific edit proposed. The article talk page is the appropriate venue for discussion of content. Katietalk 03:25, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

My specific edit was to change the last line of the header to what it is says later in the article. I said "My request or suggestion is to change the language in the header to what is said later in the article (which is cited), or cite a source for the original claims." If you can't find a source or if that's not how this process works then my "proposal" is to just change the wording to match. Also, the talk page is also semi-protected, otherwise I wouldn't have posted here. WikiUser2244 (talk) 04:06, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

You'd be right, that isn't how the process works. You need to bring what specific changes you want to have made, admins are only proxies for these small edits after all so they can't do anything that requires more than a copypaste or that forwards a specific POV. If you have a different wording for the unsourced sentence in the lede then that probably could be done seeing as it's an unsourced statement, just need to say where it is and what it should read as with cites if you have them. tutterMouse (talk) 06:17, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Okay, so I'd like to change the last sentence of the header to read "Trump's politically incorrect, anti-illegal immigration politics, which also concentrated on terrorism and national security concerns, earned him support among working-class voters and voters without college educations amid heavy and frequent controversies in the news media," for the reasons stated originally. The source that cites this is source 200. WikiUser2244 (talk) 14:50, 5 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

Restoring as the request wasn't actually done, I would do it but it's a hot button article I'd rather not be involved with. tutterMouse (talk) 11:30, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
In short, I agree with the first responding admin that this is a talk page matter. In detail: It should be "anti-illegal-immigration policies"; that's a three-word compound adjective. Needs comma before "amid" (the voters' educations are not what's amid the controversies). Other than that, this seems reasonable wording as far as it goes, but not as a blanket replacement. My concern would be that there are likely other sources in the the article for "widespread opposition from" various demographics. It's not that the lead is making a unitary unsourced claim; rather it is doing what a lead is supposed to do, summarizing various material in the article that is sourced lower down. It's a general principle that stuff in the lead does need to be sourced there but only if it's likely to be controversial or challenged. Anything at all like this is controversial and likely to be challenged, so the lead simply needs the sources for those claims added to it, even if WikiUser2244's particular wording tweak is also used as a substitute for part of it. The only danger would be WP:OR, in the form of synthesis that "leads" the reader, e.g. if it said something like "because of his position on national security concerns, he earned the enmity of Hispanic voters", an implication our sources don't make and that we should not draw (they suggest that it was because of his anti-illegal-immigration perspective, which while it relates strongly to national security concern, in Trump's views, to Muslim immigration, it does not to Hispanic immigration).  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  15:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Four days is a long time, don't think WikiUser2244 is returning but I'll ping them anyway to see if they have any more input. tutterMouse (talk) 12:56, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Handled requests[edit]

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