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
Please add an edit request to the talk page of the protected page before adding an edit request here | ||
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: High level of vandalism from numerous users. Signed, SleepyRedHair. (talk - contribs) 15:11, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – LTA IP hopper has been adding his own name to the page since July, and falsely claiming to be the husband of Isha Ambani (WP:BLP concerns). Yuvaank (talk) 15:19, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Indef semi-protect please. Essentially no IP edits in the last year have been constructive. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:45, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection (perhaps until the end of the current TV season on December 17). Reason: High level of unsourced additions by IP editors. -- Wikipedical (talk) 16:58, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Continued random attempts to sanitize this as anything but a far-right concept. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 17:28, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recent temporary account vandalism. ShallowC (talk) 20:35, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary protection: Rapid vandalism by multiple anons Adakiko (talk) 21:16, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Repeated target of IP vandalism, particularly from one SPA evading a block. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 00:25, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations – Edit-warring over birth date, picture, middle name, etc. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:14, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Long-term disruption?. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 03:17, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Requesting temporary protection due to disruptive editing after a formal Third Opinion decision.
I followed the entire WP:DR process: • Raised concerns on the Talk Page. • Other editor (Mortdav) did not respond. • Requested WP:Third Opinion. • Third Opinion reviewer confirmed my edits to the Lead and Awards sections were neutral, properly sourced, and compliant with WP:BLP, WP:NPOV, and WP:V. • Third Opinion reviewer restored my edits.
Immediately after the 3O ruling, the same editor reverted the article again without discussion and accused me of “paid editing” without evidence. This is occurring on a Biography of a Living Person (BLP), where unsourced or promotional claims must be handled carefully.
The editor is: — ignoring the Talk Page — ignoring the Third Opinion result — repeatedly reverting stable, sourced edits — making improper accusations
This pattern is disruptive on a BLP and undermines consensus.
Requesting temporary semi-protection or extended-confirmed protection while discussion continues.
Jadu23 (talk) 08:08, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: High level of vandalism and the user not editing appropriately to source material; the user is already known for nonconstructive edits according to their contribution history Junsik1223 (talk) 12:28, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Repeated additions of contentious, dubious sourced material to a BLP. Edit warring. Adakiko (talk) 13:07, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent addition of unsourced content. Waxworker (talk) 15:05, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Very high profile subject, and the diffs here: [1] show that there has been high level of disruptive editing, and some edits are unsourced, vandalism, or both or, on some occasions removing references/content without explaining why or for no good reason whatsoever. Require Auto Confirmed access, at least 1-3 months, I would be against it being indefinite considering the subject is high profile. I also wouldn't be against requiring Extended Confirmed access for a few months or indefinitely, or applying indefinite protection that starts with 30/500 protection which gets reduced to 4/10 protection later. Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:47, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- Comment There has been further vandalism since this request here: [2]. The user who vandalized the page has since been blocked, but I still figure protection is justified (Possibly even more justified now) due to the reasons I have provided above. Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:07, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite extended-confirmed protection: Addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content. Extended confirmed or pending changes due to continuous addition of unsourced content by multiple editors 10mmsocket (talk) 21:33, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Trial of Michael Jackson / Cultural impact of Michael Jackson / 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations / Personal relationships of Michael Jackson
- Trial of Michael Jackson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Cultural impact of Michael Jackson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- 1993 Michael Jackson sexual abuse allegations (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Personal relationships of Michael Jackson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I would like to request that all of these pages get upgraded to the highest level of edit protection especially ones related to the allegations due to the contentious nature & stature of Michael Jackson. As all of his pages are prone to vandalism, editing wars & just recently new accounts made 2 days ago & a week or two ago took to the trial page to vandalize it with a large string of edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Never17 (talk • contribs) 09:07, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. The edits to the trial article are not vandalism but part of a content dispute and are being discussed at Talk:Trial of Michael Jackson#"Timeline" - POV and tone section templates. Favonian (talk) 16:17, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – The user who was adding promotional and marketing content has been blocked (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Serzeskij), but they’re now using an IP address (~2025-37643-80) to continue making those edits. Everett Millais (talk) 11:13, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 11:21, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Cyberbot I — this page needs a higher level of protection. Someone is repeatedly adding promotional content, which goes against Wikipedia’s guidelines. Everett Millais (talk) 12:17, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 12:37, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Already protected by administrator ScottishFinnishRadish. Favonian (talk) 15:54, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Danners430 tweaks made 12:18, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Articles is related to the October 7 attacks and Arab-Israeli conflict Teatreez (talk) 12:48, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Reason: High profile advocacy of subject deals with Jewish identity and Israel, article has already been vandalized. Teatreez (talk) 12:49, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Filmssssssssssss (talk) 14:55, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Reason: Extended-confirmed protection: Vandalism by autoconfirmed accounts on Friday DudeJay17 (talk) 15:26, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent edit warring - I won't weigh in on the right-ness of the content, but semi-protection seems nessisary. monkeysmashingkeyboards (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent edit warring. monkeysmashingkeyboards (talk) 16:28, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 16:39, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Already protected. CoconutOctopus talk 16:40, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: BLP policy violations. General Ization Talk 16:58, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Indefinite pending changes: Persistent vandalism – Article has had long term vandalism spanning years, but not so much that semi protection would be good. There have been constructive edits from non autoconfirmed accounts. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) 17:07, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
Before posting a request for unprotection, please discuss it with the protecting administrator first. You can create a request below only if you receive no response from them.
To find out which administrator protected the page, go to the page's edit history and click on the "View logs for this page" link (located underneath the page's title). The protecting administrator is listed in the protection log entry, next to the words "protected", "changed protection level", or "configured pending changes". If there are a large number of log entries on the page, use the drop-down menu near the top of the page and select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" to filter the logs accordingly.
DO NOT request a reduction in protection if...
- ...you are being prevented from editing the page. A desire to change content is not a valid reason for unprotection. Instead:
- If you can edit the article's talk page, use the WP:Edit Request Wizard to propose a change on the article's talk page. Include an explanation of the exact content that you want to change, and what the content will be afterward.
- If the article's talk page is protected, you may propose a change at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit.
- ...your reasoning for reducing protection is that the article has not been vandalized. That simply means the protection is working as intended.
- ...your reasoning for reducing protection is basically "a long time has passed" without supporting details.
- ...you haven't contacted the protecting administrator.
You may request a protection reduction below if...
- ...you want to change the protection level of a template or module from full protection to template protection. You may add the request to this page without having to discuss it with the protecting administrator first.
- ...you need to remove creation protection from a location where no page exists (redlinked pages) after a draft version of the intended article is prepared beforehand and ready to be published.
- ...you are proposing a trial reduction in protection for a page that has been protected for several years, provided the proposal is supported by evidence such as talk page activity, page views, page traffic, number of watchers, frequency of edit requests, and prior history of vandalism.
- ...the protecting administrator is inactive or has not responded to you in several days.
If you cannot locate your request, make sure to check the request archives to see if it's been moved there. Only requests that have been recently answered will still be listed here.
Current requests for edits to a protected page
Please add an edit request to the talk page of the protected page before adding an edit request here
Requests for specific edits should be made on the talk page of the protected article. You can create an edit request below only if the talk page is also protected, preventing you from adding a request there.
- You may add the appropriate template (
{{Edit protected}},{{Edit template-protected}},{{Edit extended-protected}}, or{{Edit semi-protected}}) to the article's talk page if you would like to request an edit be made. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed. - For edit requests being made due to the editor having a conflict of interest with the article subject (see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the
{{Edit COI}}template should be used instead of the others listed above. - Requests to move pages that are currently move-protected should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not on this page.
- This page is not for holding discussions regarding content. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit that you wish to be performed.
Otherwise, this is the correct place to use in order to add an edit request if you are unable to add one to the article's talk page. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to properly add a request.
Change date for source 6 (Milmo, Dan (December 2, 2023). "ChatGPT reaches 100 million users two months after launch") from December 2, 2023 to February 2, 2023. Correct date can be seen at link. Timfduffy (talk) 02:02, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Problem 1: this genocide is unverified and is still highly disputed, even with most evidence, the United nations has not fully recognized it either, with only a small group of nations directly recognizing it (Example; Turkey, Iran, Lebanon, other Muslims nations, some other non-muslim nations) but this is still highly disputed and unverified, due to some believing it as propaganda or a anti-israel/antisemite bias. but this is unverified. I'm not denying it, I'm just making a more realistic and nuanced suggestion. BCWOZ9 (talk) 15:54, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- See the 'Frequently asked questions' section on Talk:Gaza genocide. Sean.hoyland (talk) 16:05, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Not done per Sean.hoyland's remark. Favonian (talk) 16:22, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Change the Name "Gaza Genocide" to "Gaza Crisis" this is a more non biased idea. It could also prevent the stress of potential arguments of people who see it as a actual genocide and people who do not have that same opinion. Im not going to force any changes in beliefs I'm just saying its best if we avoid any bias even if there is any truth to it Cbwozboy7 (talk) 16:00, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- See the 'Frequently asked questions' section on Talk:Gaza genocide. Sean.hoyland (talk) 16:05, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Not done per Sean.hoyland's remark. Favonian (talk) 16:22, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Handled requests
A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.