Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:RFP)
    Welcome—request protection of a page, file, or template here.

    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



    Current requests for increase in protection level

    Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level

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


    Temporary extended confirmed protection: High level of vandalism happening in this article Myuoh kaka roi (talk) 07:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of two days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. BusterD (talk) 13:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Any article about some violence in India should probably be protected for autoconfirmed users indefinitely, but I digress. WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 15:47, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Ligier European Series and child articles

    Reason: Editing war by IP users that changes his IP. He was originally block due his conduct here. He kept changing his IP to evade block and kept editing using IP's 83.determined mostly on the above articles talk pages, on of his talk page (and also on Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk 17 of march) mostly attacking other users. One of the IP's was taken to ANI and determined to be a sock (User talk:83.142.111.2). He keeps edit warring trying to reinstate content written during the block and that seeks conflict and just that.Rpo.castro (talk) 09:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I’d like to point out that the it is the talk pages of these articles that the IP keeps disrupting with their most recent edits.Tvx1 12:08, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Mellk (talk) 13:12, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined it would just move the disruption to another article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:54, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Repeated sock/IP edits from blocked user User:Twilightsparklesnelly. Belbury (talk) 16:25, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:55, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Persistent sockpuppetry by LTA. ProClasher97 ~ Have A Question? 17:21, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:58, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Persistent Vandalism Heerasmani (talk) 17:35, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:58, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content. Dieter Lloyd Wexler 18:56, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:59, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Vandalism Smart boy Ke (talk) 19:06, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Bbb23 (talk) 13:04, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: IP range persistently adds a non-free image to the article despite warnings, a note on the page saying to not do this, and even a block. The IP range was blocked yesterday and is still currently blocked, but the vandalism continues regardless. PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 19:19, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:01, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. Kajmer05 (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:04, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. Kajmer05 (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of three months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:05, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: High level of IP vandalism. If you take a look at the revision history of the page, you will see at least two IP editors vandalising the article by falsifying the R.J. Runmel estimate stating that the Ottomans killed 3,500,000 to 4,300,000 to 5.3 or 5.7 million instead, pulling these numbers out of nowhere and not providing any source. 47.51.12.122 (talk) 23:33, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Bbb23 (talk) 13:05, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. Skitash (talk) 01:15, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:06, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. -- Least Action (talk) 02:35, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Bbb23 (talk) 13:06, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Violations of the biographies of living persons policy. Parksfan1955 (talk) 03:15, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:07, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. VPN using vandal. Parksfan1955 (talk) 03:45, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of a fortnight, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:11, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Vandalism from 99.209.10.162 on edits March 20, 2025 and beyond. Did manual revert. 108.175.232.64 (talk) 04:38, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:12, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Chance of caste related edit-wars. Other similar lists (Rajputs, Marathas) already are protected. Ironborn392 (talk) 05:31, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1001 days, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:18, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent changing box office collection by IPs. Sush150 (talk) 06:48, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of six months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:19, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary protection: Edit warring - Sourced content and citation removal. Open discussion on talk page. Adakiko (talk) 09:14, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Fully protected for a period of 48 hours, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:20, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: High level of the IP addresses vandalism. Three reverts occurred recently. Martial Bean Dino (talk) 09:36, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined This one makes me nervous. Suggest raising it at BLPN, then I'll reconsider if the consensus is that the content being removed is legit. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:27, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent test edits from unregistered users. ObserveOwl (talk) 10:48, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected indefinitely. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:28, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: This page has been repeatedly vandalized by anonymous and newly registered users. Despite multiple reverts, disruptive edits continue. I request semi-protection to restrict editing to autoconfirmed users and prevent further vandalism.

    Evidence: - Vandalized version - Correct version

    Diti04ZOP (talk) 12:42, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined The article is barely five days old. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:31, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Persistent addition of unsourced content. Waxworker (talk) 13:31, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:33, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Persistent disruptive editing in the last days. Xexerss (talk) 13:39, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:34, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason:37.236.98.17 vandalism This person has manipulated the Causalities of this war Hoshkar (talk) 13:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:35, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason:37.236.98.17 vandalism This person has manipulated the Causalities of this war Hoshkar (talk) 13:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:36, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason:2a02:1406:64:baca:64e7:4403:6fb0:9d0a vandalism This person has manipulated the Causalities of this war Hoshkar (talk) 13:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:36, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason:184.147.227.225vandalism This was the man who changed the removal of the Kurdish victory to the victory of the Assyrians and Iranians, while the evidence proves that the Kurds had succeeded in invasion and massacre Hoshkar (talk) 13:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Pending changes: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 13:45, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    DeclinedWarn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:46, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: High level of IP vandalism. Pemilligan (talk) 13:56, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected by administrator Acroterion. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:47, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    YTL Corporation and child articles

    Reason: Promotional materials are constantly being added to these pages by multiple clearly paid editors (with "YTL" in their usernames). Not only do these editors refuse to declare COI in their account, they also remove the COI template from the article. Any past attempts to remove said promotional materials were reverted by these paid editors. I propose increasing the protection level to at least extended confirmed users. Traxezz (talk) 14:34, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:48, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Indefinite semi-protection: This article has had disruptive edits for almost a year where IPs add the same content over and over and are reverted over and over. The IPs never use edit summaries or respond to talk page warnings. Sometimes the IPs get banned, but just resume once the block expires. Every aspect of their edits violate guidelines of WP:V and are against all guidelines established at MOS:TV. Zatima and Power Book IV: Force have also been targets of theirs, but once those got semi-protection, all disruptive editing to those articles ceased. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:50, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:53, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Indefinite semi-protection: This article has had disruptive edits for almost a year where IPs add the same content over and over and are reverted over and over. The IPs never use edit summaries or respond to talk page warnings. Sometimes the IPs get banned, but just resume once the block expires. Every aspect of their edits violate guidelines of WP:V and are against all guidelines established at MOS:TV. Zatima and Power Book IV: Force have also been targets of theirs, but once those got semi-protection, all disruptive editing to those articles ceased. Drovethrughosts (talk) 14:50, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:54, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Frequent IP edits that need to be reverted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:02, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:56, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Persistent addition of unsourced content, plus ongoing disruptive editing by anonymous editors. livelikemusic (TALK!) 15:41, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of a week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:57, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level

    Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin on 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.

    Unprotection: 14 years of protection with little vandalism or disruption. Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:34, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Black Kite: pinging protecting admin. Daniel Case (talk) 02:30, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: reason=This article presents a fake story with no verifiable sources. The original, factual content was removed and replaced with false information.check this official link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheraman_Juma_Mosque)(https://www.keralatourism.org/destination/cheraman-juma-masjid-kodungalloor/81/)(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malik_Dinar) AHAMMEDNIZAR (talk) 08:07, 23 March 2025 (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

    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.


    in the section Uncontroversial technical requests, put {{subst:RMassist|Eclipse (software)|Eclipse (IDE)reason="software" says nothing about what it does}} - 2600:4040:AE89:A00:6CE3:2E6F:4377:C354 (talk) 18:16, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    There are citations needed for the section "For the fiscal year 2021, Amazon reported earnings of US$33.36 billion, with an annual revenue of US$469.82 billion, an increase of 21.7% over the previous fiscal cycle. Since 2007 sales increased from 14.835 billion to 469.822 billion, due to continued business expansion.[citation needed]"

    I have found three references from bloggingwizard, investing.com and wallstreetnumbers.com that back those claims but I don't have permissions to add them.

    For some reason I can't add full URLs here because I get a "spamblacklist" but happy to share. Joanfihu (talk) 15:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Handled requests

    A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.