Wikipedia:Requests for page protection
| 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.
Reason: This article has been subject to edit warring by sockpuppets and temporary accounts since August 1. See relevant SPI page and thread on WikiProject Medicine talk page. The editors need to go talk it out on the talk page instead of reverting each other, and a bit of page protection would encourage this. Dreamyshade (talk) 23:43, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. AriuCH (talk) 23:46, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
Reason: WP:LOUTSOCK editwarring by WP:UNCIVIL and WP:NOTHERE user BashoTanka (talk · contribs). See Borgenland (talk) 00:54, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
Reason: Immediately after the old protection expired we already got temporary accounts thinking this page is for talking with ChatGPT. I believe indefinite protection is needed here. Skyshiftertalk 01:57, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 1 year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Yue🌙 (talk) 05:13, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – Multiple TAs adding or changing information on page without proper sourcing. Seems to be the changes are contextual or assumed in violation of WP:CRYSTAL. Sulfurboy (talk) 02:36, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
Reason: Temporary accounts repeatedly removing the company's former names; circumstances suggest a possible COI. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 03:57, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Probably no reason for anyone to ever edit again. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 04:17, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
- Semi-protected indefinitely. Yue🌙 (talk) 05:11, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Only needs protection for maybe an hour or less, there is a severe sandbox vandal spamming right now. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 04:37, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Two edits is not severe vandal spamming. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:32, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent death. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 05:25, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
User(s) blocked: ~2026-43875-06 (talk · contribs) blocked by Mfield. The Bushranger One ping only 05:31, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
Unprotection: Was suddenly indefinitely protected in 2015 by an admin who's not so active anymore. Even then vandalism was pretty sparse and could be mitigated, and it absolutely did not require an indefinite page protection. And the page doesn't seem to be a target for school kids anyways. If it was, the page for the author, Anna Sewell, would also be protected. MrCleanAd (talk) 17:28, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
- Looking at its pre-protection edit history it looks a good candidate for pending changes protection rather than semi protection.
- Gourleyo (talk) 17:46, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
- Let's try temporary pending changes, if disruption still occurs make it indefinite. MrCleanAd (talk) 19:31, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
- Even though they were desysopped by ArbCom six years ago, the admin who protected it edited as recently as a couple of days ago. Their thoughts on the matter and why it was protected might be worth taking into consideration. Pinging @Kudpung Daniel Case (talk) 22:05, 9 August 2026 (UTC)
- @MrCleanAd, @Daniel Case: The instruction on the top of this page, highlighted in yellow, is: Before posting a request for unprotection, please discuss it with the protecting administrator first. You can create a request below if you receive no response from them. If those posting here had done their homework (rather than citing irrelevant background information), it would have been clear why the decision to semi-protect was taken 11 years ago, as Fluffernutter, Materialscientist, Moe Epsilon, Gilliam, Claidheamhmor, Eyesnore, Wtmitchell, TheEpTic, Passengerpigeon, Drmies, Gilliam NebY, Vacation9, Denisarona, and Dubmill, who are still around will attest, as well as dozens more reverts by ClueBot, during the the pre 2015 period -
pretty sparse
?. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:48, 9 August 2026 (UTC)- That's why I pinged you, to note that you had been more active than the filer believed. As for the mention of your desysopping, there has been some uncertainty here as to whether a no-longer admin must still be contacted and as to whether the circumstances and timing under which they left the administrative ranks have any bearing, so if anyone thought that made the requirement moot they could be expected to say so.
- And thanks for the info—again that's why we have that ask-the-protecting-admin requirement. Saves the time that going through tons of ancient page history where decisions may not be as well-documented as we would hope. Daniel Case (talk) 01:17, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
- So overall,
Not done The Bushranger One ping only 02:48, 10 August 2026 (UTC)
- So overall,
Current requests for edits to a protected page
I request the following sentence be removed from the lead's 2nd paragraph:
"and subsequently annexing the Strait of Hormuz"
This sentence was recently added but is completely unsourced, not in the body, and POV pushing. Although Iran has claimed sovereignty over the strait, there are no sources claiming that it has actually successfully annexed it during the ongoing war or even attempted officially to do so. The linked page on sovereignty in the text which is a new page created by the same user also doesn't even support this wording of annexation. Current talks between Iran and Oman are about shared administration as well, not annexation. ~2026-43592-81 (talk) 07:20, 7 August 2026 (UTC)
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.