Wikipedia:Requests for page protection
 | This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. Please replace this notice with {{no admin backlog}} when the backlog is cleared. |
| 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 | ||
|
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 |
Current requests for increase in protection level
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.
Indefinite semi-protection: Inappropriate use of user talk page while blocked. Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 03:40, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: The election related to this page is very soon, and as the event approaches, vandalism is likely to increase due to the controversial nature of the subject. 70P53D (talk) 08:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. From AS-RNY (talk) 09:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. From AS-RNY (talk) 09:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Persistent vandalism – The page has a lengthy history of repeated changes to the date of birth without reliable sources. Numerous attempts have been made by both IP and registered users to alter this information as shown in the differences [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. This ongoing issue is wasting a considerable amount of time for both the community and the pending changes reviewers, who are continually reviewing and reverting these vandalism.
I request that the protection level be increased to "extended confirmed user" to address this issue and allow the community to focus on other projects. Chanel Dsouza (talk) 09:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated vandalism by IPs. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 09:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated vandalism by IPs. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 09:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent addition of content and references that don't align with each other.[12][13][14] Hotwiki (talk) 10:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 12:00, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Blanking of sources by an IP address which were replaced by sources that are not considered reliable. Wozal (talk) 12:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GoodnightmushTalk 14:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: High level of vandalism. Kansas Bear (talk) 12:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – A lot of BLP vandalism over the last couple of days, with IPs and new users adding an unsourced death date. bonadea contributions talk 12:53, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: High level of IP vandalism (Hate based) Refael Ackermann (talk) 13:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. GoodnightmushTalk 14:22, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Contentious topic (ARBPIA) Procyon117 (talk) 13:44, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Ongoing attempts to add promotional information about this politician. VVikingTalkEdits 14:01, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Semi'd for one week Babysharkboss2!! (I spread pro-Weezer propaganda) 15:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Persistent edit warring by IPs without taking concerns to talk page. Random IPs keep arguing about casualty numbers, ignoring the well cited evidence for such numbers, and reverting or changing the numbers without actual reason. Another editor said to take concerns to talk page, and yet, they changed the infobox yet again without any input into the talk page. An editor back on September 30th also fixed a mess up of well cited content by IPs,[15] yet they then just changed it again on faulty logic that they keep citing but is not even true regarding what they're using as evidence. Before that editor fixed it, another editor reverted the changes by IPs and noted it as unnecessary,[16] and continue to not cite sources despite all the cited evidence going against their opinions. This is the second or third time that protection has to be requested for the page. The IPs ignore the citations by scholars including Frieser et al, and Töppel. As a result of IPs not discussing at all, I have entered a new topic in the talk page for discussion as well. As of October 14, 2025, IPs are still changing what is agreed upon by editors.[17] Reaper1945 (talk) 14:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Was protected before for rampant BLP violations and other unverified content. Today, improperly sourced material was added again. — W.andrea (talk) 14:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent Disruptive Editing. Persistent disruption and vandalism, has been protected many times in the past so indefinite protection or at least a lengthier protection might not be a bad idea. TylerBurden (talk) 15:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: High level of antisemitic vandalism BobFromBrockley (talk) 15:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – The LTA IP harasser again (initals MAB). Zinnober9 (talk) 15:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Not done Reasons explained via email if needed. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
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.
Current requests for edits 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.
My suggestion is to leave out the following 2 sentences in the "German complicity" paragraph as they seem to be based on misunderstandings:
"She also highlighted police suppression of pro-Palestine protests throughout Germany[509] as evidence of state complicity.[508] Karen Wells et al. highlight how Germany has entrenched its complicity in Israel's actions by banning use of the word "genocide" in reference to Israel.[471][better source needed]"
1. In general violent protests are not allowed in Germany. As some of the first pro-Palestine protests were violent, they were sometimes forbidden by courts, if they were expected to turn violent. But that is common policy in Gemany with all subjects and not special for pro-Palestine protests.
Meanwhile, there even is a calendar concerning pro-Palestinian protests[18] with daily up to 20 protests all over Germany. Thus, there is no general police suppression of pro-Palestine protests as is suggested by the current wording.
2. The word “genocide” is not banned in reference to Israel in Germany - maybe that was a misunderstanding: What is not allowed in Germany is to call for genocide against Jews. The slogan “From the river to the sea” is seen as such call and banned. Gilbert04 (talk) 15:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @FortunateSons: A quick browse shows at least for the first part support for removal, can you add any additional incite? -- Cdjp1 (talk) 12:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've removed #2. But there does seem to be evidence that pro-Palestine protests have been banned in parts of Germany at times.[19][20][21].VR (Please ping on reply) 14:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Consider changing "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations, and accused the court of being antisemitic, which it often does when criticised" to "The Israeli government has been accused of consistently weaponizing antisemitism against it's critics, including in the ICJ ruling." Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- The Weaponization of antisemitism page hyperlinked over "often done" has many sources to draw from regarding the accusations' consistency and nature.
- My main concern with the original text is that it's voiced as if it's an observation made by a Wikipedian. The benefit here is that the weaponization of antisemitism has a clearer consistency grounded outside of Wikipedia. Perhaps other ways to word this out include adding a time scale (increasingly accused since Oct. 7th) or specifying the critique (against critiques of their actions since Oct 7th).
- If a lead paragraph change is necessary, there may be reason to outline Israeli motives and conditions for the genocide, including Zionism and anti-Arab racism. Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Ecco2kstan, how about: "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations. Supporters of Israel say that accusing Israel of genocide is both antisemitic[22][23] and a form of Holocaust erasure[24], but others argue antisemitism shouldn't be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations.[25][26][27][28]".VR (Please ping on reply) 00:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not as familiar with the Holocaust erasure claims, but I'm happy with that reworking! If that weaponization of Holocaust denial detail isn't on the weaponization of antisemitism page already, it might be a worthwhile phenomenon incorporate if there's more citations you can find. I might look into it myself. Thanks! Ecco2kstan (talk) 03:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Ecco2kstan, how about: "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations. Supporters of Israel say that accusing Israel of genocide is both antisemitic[22][23] and a form of Holocaust erasure[24], but others argue antisemitism shouldn't be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations.[25][26][27][28]".VR (Please ping on reply) 00:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.