Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Rfp)
"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 of article protection, upload protection, or create 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.


    San Diego Zoo

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term disruptions by IPs. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 05:15, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked: 216.30.155.0/24 (talk · contribs). Favonian (talk) 13:04, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Hope Hines

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated addition of unsourced and unclear information - something about a battle of restaurants - by IP editors. Tacyarg (talk) 06:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    S. M. Kamrul Hassan

    Reason: Temporary extended-confirmed protection - Repeated introduction of puffery and unsourced biographical content by a registered user, currently edit-warring with me over it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 08:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Aha! (TV program)

    Reason: Continuous unconstructive edits from IP users this month (specifically this Ip user[1], either unreferenced edits or subtle vandals such changing reference dates. Hotwiki (talk) 08:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Barli Inscription

    Reason: Constant edit warring Expectopatronum30 (talk) 09:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Some Sexy Songs 4 U

    Reason: Edit warring and failure to follow WP policies for references M48SKY (talk) 09:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 12:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Suno AI

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Non-English test edits/vandalism continued past previous protection periods of 2 and 3 weeks. Volume is low but high as a percentage of legitimate editing activity. TheDragonFire (talk) 10:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Sambhaji

    Full protection Persistent content blanking- Owing to off wiki legal action being taken against Wikipedia due to contents of this page. See WP:AN#Article being reported to cyber police and [2] - Ratnahastin (talk) 10:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 12:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Anastasia Kvitko

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Mellk (talk) 11:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Sydney nurses anti-Israel remarks incident

    Extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement for Arab-Israel conflict topic area. Left guide (talk) 12:13, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    WP:Articles for deletion/Sydney nurses anti-Israel remarks incident

    Extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement for Arab-Israel conflict topic area. Left guide (talk) 12:13, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Bahlil Lahadalia

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. –twotwofourtysix(talk || edits) 12:52, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 13:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Anyma

    Reason: Persistent, disruptive addition of unreferenced genres. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    2025 ICC Champions Trophy

    Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Disruptive editing by multiple new users. Vestrian24Bio 13:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 14:08, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Emily Reid

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. •Cyberwolf•. talk? 14:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 14:20, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Battle of Bhupalgarh

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. - Ratnahastin (talk) 14:24, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Cambodian genocide denial

    Reason: Vandalism by a user led to all text and images being deleted on the 12 February. page must be given extended confirmed protection. Bird244 (talk) 14:27, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    CeCé Telfer

    Semi-protection: Persistent misgendering of a trans BLP. Funcrunch (talk) 15:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    University of California, Davis

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. I am One of Many (talk) 15:13, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Twinkle Khanna

    Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – repeated addition of poorly formated sources. Sid95Q (talk) 15:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Kartikeya

    Reason: Require semi-protection. High level of IP vandalism. Hbanm (talk) 15:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    United Lutheran Seminary

    Reason: Several edits have been made that present as fact allegations from a lawsuit that has not yet been adjudicated. (Trotter v. United Lutheran Seminary) While the defendant's motion for dismissal by summary judgment was denied that does not indicate future rulings or verdicts. The edits have also made libelous statements regarding one, non-public individual in particular. 184.14.210.198 (talk) 16:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Deltarune

    Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Long-term disruption from anonymous and new users. If not indefinite, I would recommend a longer protection period, seeing as shorter periods have not previously worked. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:11, 19 February 2025 (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 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.

    Shortcuts

    Sambhaji

    Reason: The protection is no longer needed because the content in the site has many errors 

    156.107.90.74 (talk) 09:30, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment The current bluelock doesn't seem enough per recent edits, recommend goldlock. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Not unprotected – Necessity of protection amply demonstrated. Favonian (talk) 13:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Kanguva

    Reason: The protection is no longer needed as there clearly isn't any vandalism at the moment.

    (2405:6E00:223A:8C3D:549A:2FF:FE75:A344 (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC))[reply]

    Not unprotected – There's clearly no vandalism because the article is protected. The brief period around New Year, in which the article was unprotected, clearly demonstrated the need for protection. Favonian (talk) 16:21, 19 February 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
    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


    Sambhaji

    The statement 'In 1683, he invaded Portuguese Goa, during which Maratha soldiers raped Christian women and later sold captured men and women to Arabs and the Dutch' is not supported by the cited source. I have reviewed the reference, and it does not mention these claims. This statement is also present under the 'Portuguese and English' section. Who added this, and why? It appears that significant parts of this article have been negatively altered and seem to have been written by someone to portray a negative image. Please review and correct any biased or unsourced content. Arrowxw (talk) 03:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    @Arrowxw: Vague and sourceless requests will not be considered. (And we will not be citing Chhaava in either book or novel form; we do not cite works of fiction even if they are based on historical events.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 04:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not citing anything. I just wanted to let you know that the above statement has no relevant references. Why has this information been added to the page? Arrowxw (talk) 04:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Arrowxw: And being an editor who pointedly avoids the Indian Subcontinent topic area, I cannot answer your question other than to say that this is not an edit request that can be acted on because it is too vague. If you want us to review and correct any biased or unsourced content you're more than welcome to identify where in the article other than the lead section the claim(s) you're objecting to are in. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 04:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I am making an edit request to remove the following statements:
    From the lead section: 'In 1683, he invaded Portuguese Goa, during which Maratha soldiers raped Christian women and later sold captured men and women to Arabs and the Dutch.'
    From the 'Portuguese and English' section: 'According to an account by Padre Francisco de Souza, Marathas looted, destroyed churches, and raped Christian women... The breasts were cut off.'
    These statements are not supported by the citations or references provided and are irrelevant to the article. Please consider removing them to maintain accuracy and neutrality." Arrowxw (talk) 04:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Arrowxw: (And for what it's worth, Maratha–Portuguese War (1683–1684) has this claim as well, with two separate sources for it.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 04:15, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I have reviewed the sources, and it appears to be the same source. As I mentioned, these sources seem irrelevant to the statement. I have checked them and found no information that supports the claim. I believe this statement should be removed due to the lack of relevant sources. Arrowxw (talk) 04:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Arrowxw: You must have missed it then. I reviewed the source and found the passage which supports most of the claim. See Talk:Sambhaji#Fact added without citation. I did not see anything about the breast bit, but since the rest is supported I don't see any particular reason to trust your claim it isn't in the sources. Nil Einne (talk) 04:45, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nil Einne: It's in the footnote on pg. 55 of the source cited there, and is an attributed direct quote even there. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    So, just to understand correctly—this article is based on Portuguese official records from the Goa Archives, where the Portuguese were hostile to Sambhaji Maharaj. Additionally, is it acceptable to include this information in the lead section? This approach seems unfair and biased. Arrowxw (talk) 09:30, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    What other specific published sources would you prefer us use? This isn't an insult, it's a genuine question given you've provided no other source to counter the bias you allege. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I am following up on my request to remove the statements I mentioned earlier from the page, as the references used are based on Portuguese official records from the Goa Archives, which come from a historically adversarial source. This violates Wikipedia’s Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy, as it does not present a balanced perspective.
    Additionally, the statement has been deliberately placed in the lead section to portray a negative image, which is not a standard practice in similar articles. I request a review and removal of this biased content to ensure neutrality and consistency across Wikipedia. Arrowxw (talk) 15:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Arrowxw: I don't think you've read many other articles if you assume that to be the case. Lede sections contain negative information all the time if they're a significant part of the subject's life/history (as an example, Phil Spector). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:18, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Rumel Ahmed

    I would like to request that the page User:Jabiyan/sandbox be moved to Rumel Ahmed. The draft has been significantly improved and is ready for review. However, the page "Rumel Ahmed" is still locked due to old logs. I would appreciate guidance on how to move the page once it's finalized. . Jabiyan (talk) 11:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Submit it for review. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 16:04, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Willy Scheffler bio.

    Herr Scheffler was also designer of Copper Mountains National Ski Championships in the early and mid 1980's as a close friend to Chuck Lewis Copper s owner and founder Willy was a frequent visiter al Copper 2600:6C67:127F:FFCD:D966:21B:F8D5:B671 (talk) 15:59, 19 February 2025 (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=1276558193"