Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase: Difference between revisions

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.

Temporary semi-protection: Addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content. Repeated addition of unsourced content by IP editor 10mmsocket (talk) 13:58, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. I have given them a level 2 warning about the MOSFLAGS issues. Daniel Case (talk) 19:40, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noted and thankyou. 10mmsocket (talk) 19:49, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IPs (likely the same person) keep removing the mention of a film in which the actor has worked and edit wars [1] [2] [3] [4]. The entry is reliably referenced using WP:ICTF compliant sources, and more are available online, some dated today. Note the POV comments in these edit summaries [5] [6], usage of phrases like ‘not main role’ ‘gaining lost attention’, ‘PR team’, etc. Thanks. – Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:20, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. I have extended the existing IP block to its range and left a CTOPS notice on talk. Daniel Case (talk) 19:50, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Incessant IP vandalism over a single, unsourced issue. Anwegmann (talk) 17:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked: ~2025-31219-58 (talk · contribs) blocked by Daniel Case. for 24 hours for a 3RR vio. Daniel Case (talk) 19:59, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content – IP hopper is repeatedly adding poorly sourced and unsourced content. CycloneYoris ^talk! 17:08, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) partially blocked‘ (from two pages‘). — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:31, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion. Toast1454_TC 18:47, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This one as well. Toast1454_TC 18:48, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The IP was blocked as those various temp accounts are from the same user over time. It appears they dump the temp user cookie and proceed with a different temp account the next time, which is why I blocked the IP instead. Those edits are from before I placed the block. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:28, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – New IP users, possibly the same person by similarity of IP numbers, have exceeded WP:3RR to disrupt the standard format of production data. The user(s) appears to be making a WP:OR self-calculation rather than citing available UN data. Zefr (talk) 17:43, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Underlying IP blocked. Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 18:01, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Recent and frequent target of IPs and now a temp acct likely associated with WP:LTA/HABS. The Kip ^(contribs) 18:27, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 18:37, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 18:53, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) partially blocked‘ (from Montgomery Academy (Alabama)‘). — rsjaffe 🗣️ 19:25, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reason: Persistent Vandalism ZonResearcher (talk) 19:27, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked: ~2025-31266-82 (talk · contribs) blocked by Asilvering. for 31 hours. Daniel Case (talk) 20:01, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reason: Please review the Talk and edit history of this page. There has been a long history of disruptive and NPOV editing, including just the language being used in the lead, because some editors believe a consensus has been achieved that this model is established as “pseudoscientific” and therefore there is no reason not to use dismissive language on what is clearly an article that must either be treated as a contentious topic or should not exist at all. But I do not agree that any such consensus has ever been reached. Because I don’t have enough administrative background to know what will best help without doing some digging into established policy and precedent, I have been trying to find alternate ways to solve the problem and finally arrived at the view that a continuous level of protection is necessary for this page’s NPOV issues to be fully resolved and addressed. Kat (a.k.a. CleverTitania) (talk) (contribs) 20:09, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article’s talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. A content dispute between two editors is not grounds for full protection at this time, and lesser protection when one of the disputing editors is an unregistered editor would smack of using protection to win the dispute. The unregistered editor has been warned for personal attacks; assuming they take the warning to heart, discussion on the content dispute should continue on the article talk page. If instead the choose to continue edit-warring, report them to WP:AN/EW. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:00, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. —pro–anti–air ––>(talk)<–– 20:25, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 20:26, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Constant disruptive edits, maybe not indefinite protection, but certainly for a considerable while. MakaylaHippo1998 (talk) 20:25, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]