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 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
Request the non-urgent protection of multiple pages that do not require immediate administrator attention
| ||
Current requests for increase in 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 the page history. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Almost every change over the past few months (aside from reverts and removing protection notice) has been disruptive, even before a semi-protection of one year ended. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:00, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry – Sockpuppetry crossed with COI/UPE. The exact details of how many people are involved are a bit opaque because of the sockpuppetry but it appears to be at least two, including the article subject and someone paid to edit on her behalf. They have been asked to clarify this, stop engaging in sockpuppetry, and make the necessary disclosures (see here, here, here and here) but haven't done so.
They have a good faith desire to see the article updated and to see some unnecessary person info removed from it (which has now been done); but they are not using sources, removing existing sources and relevant info without explanation, and generally being disruptive. Protecting the page might prompt them to engage in discussion and lead to a resolution of these good faith concerns. AntiDionysius (talk) 15:33, 4 October 2026 (UTC)
Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – Per the relevant AFD, this should have been salted. The original creator circumvented the AfC process and is likely UPE. Jdcomix (talk) 00:13, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Request previous protection be reinstated indefinitely due to ongoing disruption by SPAs in this topic area. ChompyTheGogoat [ Bleat | Munched ] 02:58, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Curbon7 (talk) 08:55, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – A recently-registered user has made persistent low-quality edits to this page and simply restored them when they were reverted, incorrectly claiming that no explanation was given. Reverting these edits again would probably not be effective without preventing this editor from restoring them. Theemausoliam (talk) 03:59, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Reason: Brisbane Lions fans keep falsely claiming that this won them a premiership when it did not and keep adding it to the pages. Logged out users also keep vandalising the page with stuff about the lions such as "Lions won a prem with it" or "Lions own Wharfie Time now".
I would like to request a 3-6 month protection window while the hype from the 2026 AFL Grand Final dies down Flipstatic Energy (talk) 04:08, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Reason: Continued unconstructive edits to the article, including alterations to the article's MOS and changes to the infobox image without any valid reason, by a new editor despite warnings on the talk page. The editor has not responded to the talk-page message and continues to edit the article. E.Saravanan (talk) 05:29, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
User(s) blocked. Curbon7 (talk) 06:56, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent disruptive editing on this page and other Ahom-related pages. I think this falls under Contentious topics - South Asia. Theemausoliam (talk) 05:53, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Reason: Promotional material has been added by a number of sockpuppets. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BManning08 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TheFinalCut1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Upgrader101
After these accounts were banned the same edits are now being made by temporary accounts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/~2026-50864-93 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/~2026-53104-86 Idontwantaaccount (talk) 07:06, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Reason: Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Recent removal/reversion of sourced material and continued disruption by a new user connected to the same dispute affecting other Ahom-related articles like Joymoti Konwari and Ahom kingdom. The article falls within the South Asia contentious topic, and temporary extended-confirmed protection may help prevent further disruption. Ananya Taye (talk) 07:59, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Reason: RighteousCoyote384 ~2026-53431-36 (talk) 08:35, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Curbon7 (talk) 08:40, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Reason: RighteousCoyote384 ~2026-53431-36 (talk) 08:40, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Curbon7 (talk) 08:45, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Reason: RighteousCoyote384 ~2026-53431-36 (talk) 08:40, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Curbon7 (talk) 08:45, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Reason: RighteousCoyote384 ~2026-53431-36 (talk) 08:40, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
- Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Curbon7 (talk) 08:45, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
- Timeline of the introduction of color television in countries and territories (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Reason: RighteousCoyote384 ~2026-53431-36 (talk) 08:50, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Reason: RighteousCoyote384 ~2026-53431-36 (talk) 08:50, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: I think more permanent protection should be implement for this page. As of now, there is a clear pattern of a page receiving a temporarily protection of around a month or so, and being imminently vandalized by several bot accounts the moment it expires. Since it's seems clear that there are some automated accounts set up to attack this page, I doubt it can just waited out until the vandal gets bored. As such maybe a one-year-long or a fully permanent protection could be a better solution, than having people repair vandalisms and restore the temporary protections every month. Sorry for spam, but this discussion was deleted by a bot while I slept, without even giving me a change to read the response, left along give the requested clarification. It was noted that the page is already protected, but it completely misses what I'm asking for. Currently, it is put under yet another one-month-long protection until November, while I'm asking for it to be extended for at least a year or indefinitely. Also, I do not think discussions like that should be just deleted before people are even given a chance to respond. Artemis Andromeda (talk) 09:20, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
- Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 09:34, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
- A page is under a temporary protection until 4 November 2026, while I'm asking for it to be extended to at least 4 October 2027, or indefinitely, as I don't think a one-month-long protection will be successful in deterring vandalism on the page. Artemis Andromeda (talk) 09:40, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Multiple TA vandalism in recent days. SuperFastSpellChecker (talk) 09:25, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Requesting reduction in protection to pending changes, page was inf semi-protected over 3 years ago. The page also desperately needs updates and allowing more people to submit edits may help solve this. Szxq (talk) 05:21, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
- @Ferret: Szxq (talk) 05:25, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
- I'd say no, but I'd leave it up to Ferret. Anyone can still make an edit request. The article consistently averages 1000 page views per day for all of 2026 so far. And it appears to be actively edited. The page history includes a high proportion of reverted edits prior to protection, and pending-change protection would not change that situation if the same activity resumes, edits would still need reversion, so such protection would simply become a burden on the community as if it was unprotected. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 05:52, 3 October 2026 (UTC)
- Declined – No changes to the current protection level are required at this point in time. After having looked at ferret's userpage (he isn't an admin anymore, and was online in the meantime) we won't probably get any input from him now. I agree with my esteemed colleague above. Let's leave it at semi-protection for the time being. Lectonar (talk) 07:13, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Unprotection: Protected back when it was a redirect due to create-warring, now an established article, and I don't see any other issues with this article otherwise. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 07:26, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Unprotection: Only has 536 transclusions, should be OK to downgrade to EC. Besides, the vast majority of those transclusions are not real transclusions; they are transclusions from toolbox templates. Maayaaaaa (talk) 09:18, 5 October 2026 (UTC)
Current requests for edits to a protected page
Change “Collapse of the June ceasefire (July)” to “Collapse of the June ceasefire (20 June - 31 July)” because the June ceasefire ended on 19 June, not 30 June. ~2026-47054-03 (talk) 00:02, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
- Is a source for this already in the article? Daniel Case (talk) 02:34, 27 September 2026 (UTC)
OpenAI has decided to pause its training on all versions ~2026-50272-23 (talk) 15:48, 27 September 2026 (UTC)
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.