Jump to content

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 remove obvious vandalism.


    Request addition of protection to a page, or increasing the current protection level

    Request removal of protection from a page, or reducing the current protection level

    Request a specific edit be made to a protected page
    Please add an edit request to the talk page of the protected page before adding an edit request here


    Current requests for increase in protection level

    Request addition of protection to a page, or increasing the current protection level
    Shortcuts

    Place requests for protection increases at the BOTTOM of this section. If you cannot find your request, check the archive of requests or the page history. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

    Dhurandhar: The Revenge

    Extended confirmed protection: Earlier, requested for semi protection, but still no improvement, IP vandalism is increasing ever since semi-protection got removed. Request for longer duration of protection. MNWiki845 (talk) 13:45, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Question: @MNWiki845: Is the disruption limited to IPs (TAs, actually, now)? Extended confirmed is not necessary if it is. - The Bushranger One ping only 19:20, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, lot of IPs are vandalising the article and adding a lot of unecessary and fake stuff, that's why requested the same, even though semi protection would work but duration should be increased according to me! MNWiki845 (talk) 19:24, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    If not extended confirmed protection, then semi protection would work but i believe duration should be long, request the administrators to go through the history of article once. MNWiki845 (talk) 06:21, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    List of people known as the Great

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A random user keeps reverting this article with many temporary accounts since 2025 without explaining reasons to do so. The page once get protected before, but when it expired in March they appeared again. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_people_known_as_the_Great&action=history . Coddlebean (talk) 05:53, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Devin Vassell

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Consistent addition of poorly sourced content, multiple reverts of signed out users. DaHuzyBru (talk) 06:26, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Malik Nabers

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continued persistent dubious content by signed out users, multiple reverts. DaHuzyBru (talk) 06:28, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    YouTube

    Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent vandalism. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 08:06, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences and Research

    Reason: Requesting semi-protection due to repeated disruptive editing by temporary/new accounts.

    Three temporary accounts (~2025-33465-24, ~2026-81241-1, and ~2026-80550-4) have been used to manipulate the History section of this article. All three are single-purpose accounts that have only edited this article. A sockpuppet investigation has been filed (SPI case).

    Semi-protection would prevent new and temporary accounts from continuing to edit-war on this article while the dispute is resolved through proper channels. Vinay Ambali (talk) 12:02, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    American Humane Society

    Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Long-term sockpuppetry, see page history. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 12:46, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Monica Tranel

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Subject of biography strongly disagrees with the summary of facts taken from media sources. But this summary is accurate and neutral. Binksternet (talk) 15:10, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Georgia national rugby union team

    Reason: Persistent disruptive edits by anonymous users. Lado85 (talk) 16:36, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Tyler Oliveira

    Reason: High amounts of BLP vios and some sockpuppetry going on here in the past week. Realtent (talk) 17:47, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Jewish deicide

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Andre🚐 18:15, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Michael Vick

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:15, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Nancy Mace

    Indefinite semi-protection: Another revert today, third this week. EaglesFan37 (talk) 20:38, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Bones Hyland

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:44, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Soon-Yi Previn

    Semi-Protection: Repeated unreferenced and defamatory changes, primarily by temporary accounts involving the relationship between Previn and Allen. 𝓕𝓵𝓸𝓫𝓵𝓲𝓷 (Talk to me! · My contribs) 21:05, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    2026 Iranian diaspora protests

    Reason: High level of IP vandalism; I've counted six vandalism revisions in total within the past five days alone. The article is also on the sidebar of the Current Events portal, and is linked in the 2026 Iran war article and related articles. Ronnnaldo7 (talk) 22:14, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Old Firm

    Reason: High level of anon vandalism. Ikhouvanjou14 (talk) 23:03, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Joe Ingles

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. EaglesFan37 (talk) 00:06, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Iran

    Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – 12 reverts this afternoon let's lock this up force them to the talk page and admins can deal with any requests when this is solved. Wikipedia:Contentious topics .Moxy🍁 00:40, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    +1 Endorse request - As one of the users who were involved in some of the reverts, I'll say that this is getting out of hand, not to mention that some other users are telling every involved user to "stop edit-warring" whilst at the same time, reverting edits as they join involvement in the edit-warring. NeoSyria\Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 00:58, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Mojtaba Khamenei

    Indefinite extended-confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement. related to WP:ARBPIA. NeoSyria\Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 00:43, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    +1 edit warring by two users. NeoSyria\Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 01:19, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    (Non-administrator comment) Responding sysop may be interested in the two related open reports at WP:ANEW. tony 01:35, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Exeed automobile articles

    Indefinite move protection: These articles are favorite targets of an LTA vandal known for disruptive page moves. --Sable232 (talk) 00:47, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Yuzu (emulator)

    Reason: IP Vandalism, both short term and long term Realtent (talk) 01:17, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    Request removal of protection from a page, or reducing the current protection level
    Shortcuts

    Before posting a request for unprotection, please discuss it with the protecting administrator first. You can create a request below only if you receive no response from them.

    To find out which administrator protected the page, go to the page's edit history and click on the "View logs for this page" link (located underneath the page's title). The protecting administrator is listed in the protection log entry, next to the words "protected", "changed protection level", or "configured pending changes". If there are a large number of log entries on the page, use the drop-down menu near the top of the page and select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" to filter the logs accordingly.

    DO NOT request a reduction in protection if...

    • ...you are being prevented from editing the page. A desire to change content is not a valid reason for unprotection. Instead:
      • If you can edit the article's talk page, use the WP:Edit Request Wizard to propose a change on the article's talk page. Include an explanation of the exact content that you want to change, and what the content will be afterward.
      • If the article's talk page is protected, you may propose a change at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit.
    • ...your reasoning for reducing protection is that the article has not been vandalized. That simply means the protection is working as intended.
    • ...your reasoning for reducing protection is basically "a long time has passed" without supporting details.
    • ...you haven't contacted the protecting administrator.

    You may request a protection reduction below if...

    • ...you want to change the protection level of a template or module from full protection to template protection. You may add the request to this page without having to discuss it with the protecting administrator first.
    • ...you need to remove creation protection from a location where no page exists (redlinked pages) after a draft version of the intended article is prepared beforehand and ready to be published.
    • ...you are proposing a trial reduction in protection for a page that has been protected for several years, provided the proposal is supported by evidence such as talk page activity, page views, page traffic, number of watchers, frequency of edit requests, and prior history of vandalism.
    • ...the protecting administrator is inactive or has not responded to you in several days.

    If you cannot locate your request, make sure to check the request archives to see if it's been moved there. Only requests that have been recently answered will still be listed here.

    Shortcuts

    Rob Jetten

    Reason: The article was semi-protected on February 26 by Daniel Case set to expire in May (I checked with him before posting here). I'm requesting that the protection be reduced to pending changes protection because there is a very substantive edit request on the talk page that seems to be in good faith and I think it would be good for the user to implement it themselves. ScrubbedFalcon (talk) 23:35, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Editing

    Reason The article was protected since 2016 and now a low page views. Unprotecting it can help article given how bad it is right now. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 18:57, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:2026 Minab school airstrike

    Reason: There is indefinite page protection on Talk:2026 Minab school airstrike which hinders users in my situation (non-XC) from correcting errors in the article. I have previously requested an edit to the article, but that was not made and the false information persists. Additionally I have emailed the admin who locked the page, posted to the admin's talk page, and have been directed back here. I believe the best way to correct the factual error is to unlock the article's talk page so I can collaborate on fixing the paragraph in question. Alternatively, if someone wants to thoughtfully consider and complete the article edit request I would support that outcome.

    Current article: "At the time of the airstrikes, the school was located approximately 600 metres (660 yd) away from the Sayyid al-Shuhada military complex which includes the headquarters of the Asif Brigade of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy."

    Article source for '600 metres' BBC 3/1/2026: "It is located about 600m (1970ft) from the base of the IRGC."

    News source for 'less than 100 yards' NPR 3/4/2026: "The school was located within less than 100 yards of the perimeter of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard naval base, according to satellite images and publicly available information."

    News source for "near" BBC 3/5/2026: "The school building is located near the IRGC base. Satellite imagery from 2013 appears to show the school building was part of the same compound, before a wall is seen in 2016 separating it."

    News source with additional clarity on proximity NYTimes 3/5/2026: "The school at one point was part of the Revolutionary Guards’ naval base, according to satellite images from 2013 reviewed by The Times. Roads had led from other areas of the base to the school building that was struck on Saturday. But by September 2016, satellite images show, the same building was partitioned off and was no longer connected to the base." TheLoveMuscle (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Not done The page was extended confirmed protected due to extensive disruption, and the chances of such disruption continuing have not diminished. In addition, this is not a uncontroversial simple edit request, which is all that non-WP:XC editors are allowed to do on pages under extended confirmed restrictions, as you were previously told, which is why your previous requests have not been done. I would suggest you drop the stick. The Bushranger One ping only 20:32, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm going to drop them a PIA CTOP alert. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 21:16, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    I have read the PIA CTOP alert and understand the protections currently in-place which prevent certain users from editing, but as I understand it, one of the purposes of a Wikipedia article is "neutrally written summary of existing mainstream knowledge in a fair and accurate manner with a straightforward, "just-the-facts style."" To me, the information I have called into question is not accurate, does not consider available knowledge, and contradicts other parts of the same paragraph. The evidence I have presented is best debated on the article's talk page where a consensus on an edit can be reached, but rules in-place prevent me from posting there.
    Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, and in this case an overly strict interpretation of the policies is blocking one of the stated purposes of Wikipedia. "If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them."
    I might not have much experience editing Wikipedia, so if there is a better way to have the information thoughtfully considered so it isn't in direct contradiction to the blurb about the event in 2026 Iran war article I would happily take that into account. I will continue to make efforts in good faith as I see problems in Wikipedia - if that bumps up against a bureaucracy and some consider this "beating a dead horse" so be it. TheLoveMuscle (talk) 23:04, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @TheLoveMuscle: The reason the extended-confirmed restrictions exist is because freshly-registered and unregistered users spend less time thoughtfully debating the content of the article on its merits and more time fighting with people they identify as their ideological antithesis. It is why extensive changes such as what you are proposing are limited to extended-confirmed editors, since they are going to require extensive discussion. This is not a simple "change <foo> to <bar>" edit request, and an edit request specifically alleging this was declined here a couple days ago. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 23:42, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jéské Couriano I believe that edit request linked to was the same one I made and mentioned in my initial comment. I do not wish to inject any opinions or initiate a debate on the talk page, but merely point out a glaring issue with an erroneous distance prominently featured in the article. I know rules exist for a reason, but if the rule prevents Wikipedia from improving then something must be done.
    I think if the issue were pointed out on the article's talk page then extended-confirmed users would correct the article. As it stands right now, "600 metres" is single-sourced, unchallenged on the talk page, and contradictory to more-recent sources. I don't need or want attribution or input on the wording, at this time I am trying to point out the error. TheLoveMuscle (talk) 00:19, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Request a specific edit be made to a protected page
    Please add an edit request to the talk page of the protected page before adding an edit request here
    Shortcut

    Requests for specific edits should be made on the talk page of the protected article. You can create an edit request below only if the talk page is also protected, preventing you from adding a request there.

    Otherwise, this is the correct place to use in order to add an edit request if you are unable to add one to the article's talk page. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to properly add a request.

    Further information: Wikipedia:Edit requests


    2026 Iran war

    Add to the 'Regional Impacts' section and the casualties section in the infobox:On March 8, 2026, a fisherman from Gwadar named Muhammad Tayyab was killed when his boat was struck by debris from an Israeli projectile intercepted by Iranian air defenses. Source: https://www.dawn.com/news/1979820/gwadar-fisherman-killed-by-debris-from-israeli-projectile-in-iran-waters Noorhorse (talk) 12:54, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Partly done Added to 2026 Iran war#Other countries and regions, but the infobox and 2026 Iran war#Casualties by country don't include nationals from other countries for some reason—they should probably be added at some point, but for now I'm just adding this as prose for consistency Placeholderer (talk) 21:45, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    2026 Iran war

    Two dead and 12 injured in Saudi Arabia

    https://gulfnews.com/world/gulf/saudi/2-dead-12-hurt-after-projectile-hits-building-in-saudi-arabia-1.500467712#google_vignette User6987777777 (talk) 16:42, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Already done Placeholderer (talk) 21:57, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    2026 Iran war

    Change casualties of Saudi Arabia to two killed and 12+ others injured due to an Iranian projectile hitting Al Kharj's sanitation facility. Source:https://www.egypttoday.com/Article/1/145436/2-killed-12-injured-as-projectile-hits-residential-site-in#:~:text=Sports-,2%20killed%2C%2012%20injured%20as%20projectile%20hits%20residential,in%20Saudi%20Arabia:%20Civil%20Defense&text=AL%2DKHARJ%20%E2%80%93%208%20March%202026,reserve%20the%20right%20to%20respond. Editorofwiki9998 (talk) 17:33, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Already done Placeholderer (talk) 21:57, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    2026 Iran war

    Add citation: https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/07/us/video/breaking-down-the-cost-of-war-against-iran-digvid ~2026-14890-42 (talk) 18:53, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Where would this cite go? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 21:15, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    2026 Iran war

    7 to 9 American soldiers killed, 1 non-combat

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/us-soldier-dies-of-their-wounds-in-seventh-american-casaulty-of-iran-war/

    https://www.reutersconnect.com/item/a-dignified-transfer-of-the-remains-of-us-marine-corps-lance-corporal-kevin-melendez-in-dover/dGFnOnJldXRlcnMuY29tLDIwMjY6bmV3c21sX1JDMldYSkFBMUJJSA User6987777777 (talk) 19:46, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Did end up opting to only number the deaths in action, but that might still change pending aforementioned discussion Placeholderer (talk) 22:11, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    2026 Iran war

    basic copy edit.

    Under Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb section, last paragraph. Second to last sentence, change "militar" to "military". Last sentence, change "phocusing" to "focusing". Rameal (talk) 23:05, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Mfield (Oi!) 23:34, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    2026 Iran war

    Over 2,000 Israelis have been hospitalized - needs update

    The number of Israeli wounded is out of date and its listing the number of hospitalized as the number of wounded. The actual number of wounded includes people treated on site and is higher than just the number hospitalized.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/over-2000-taken-to-israeli-hospitals-since-beginning-of-iran-war-health-ministry/ FarFromTheMiddleEast (talk) 00:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Assassination_of_Ali_Khamenei

    change "assassination" of to "killing" of. the reason is simple - assassination is murder but the killing here is not murder...the killing of the head of state during war is not murder just "killed in action" if you like. ~2026-14911-80 (talk) 01:07, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Not done This would require a discussion which you cannot partake in due to WP:ECR restrictions. Tbhotch™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 01:26, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    2026 Iran war

    Change "Killed or Dead" under U.S losses to simply just "Killed" AverageCheeseRoll (talk) 01:51, 9 March 2026 (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=1342321283"