Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:RFPP)
"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

    Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level
    Shortcuts

    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.


    List of Paramount Global television programs

    Reason: The IP hopper who frequented these kind of pages is back. They're adding unnecessary references and reverting my constructive editing, and only they seem to be fiercely objecting to what I do. Vidpro23 (talk) 12:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • Those are reliable sourced that you removed for no particular reasons. 148.252.156.137 (talk) 17:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 22:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    THX

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Block evasion by User:ImTheCool, using IPs from Rockford, Illinois. Binksternet (talk) 20:32, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked: 138.199.105.90 (talk · contribs). One year, this time. Favonian (talk) 20:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Neofetch

    Reason: Continuous section blanking without consensus being formed or discussed in talk. PinkBunnyBun (talk) 23:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Political views of J. K. Rowling

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Disruptive anonymous editing seeking to add inappropriate content and to remove longstanding settled content. DanielRigal (talk) 00:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    It's not "inappropriate content", I'm literally trying to balance up the biased lede of this article. You keep removing it rather than collaboratively editing it, so really this is your fault. Also you can't logically complain that it's unreferenced when the rest of the paragraph isn't either. I already pointed out that the references later in the article support what I wrote and I even quoted the part that I was referring to. Do better, please. 2A00:23EE:2418:718:B81C:E698:CC3A:8BF7 (talk) 00:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No you are not. That is not balance. Clearly this is not your first rodeo on Wikipedia if you can find your way here. Have you been blocked from editing under any other account or IP? DanielRigal (talk) 00:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No actually I found this through the "contribs" link next to your username in the history page. 2A00:23EE:2418:718:B81C:E698:CC3A:8BF7 (talk) 00:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Television show

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 00:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Michael Cohen (lawyer)

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. ImTheAvidPheasant (talk) 00:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the 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

    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]

    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]

    template:dn

    Downgrade from full-protection to template-protection to match the protection settings of its target page.102.156.71.151 (talk) 22:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Jacques-Yves Cousteau

    Target page is not protected since 2022 by HJ Mitchell.102.156.71.151 (talk) 00:22, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    Request a specific edit to a protected page
    Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
    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]

    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=1224900187"