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
    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

    Request addition of protection to a page, or increasing the current 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.

    Semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content. Donnowin1 (talk) 06:12, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 06:54, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – On the talk page, editors agreed that the outcome of this war should be inconclusive [1] and a third opinion user also stated that the outcome of this war should be inconclusive, [2] but today new users are changing it to an Ottoman victory. Kajmer05 (talk) 09:24, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: The article is receiving IP edits that add an exact release date (“25 December 2026”) even though reliable sources only speculate a “Christmas 2026” release and no official date has been announced. I corrected the date to “December 2026” per the source, but IP users keep reverting. Semi-protection requested to prevent misrepresentation of sources. Omnivoid 💬 10:18, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Recurring problems with unsourced content additions, vandalism and other nonconstructive editing from TAs and new accounts. While a few of these seem to be good faith, they are coming in at a rate that could make PC burdensome. Entranced98 (talk) 11:40, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Persistent disruptive editing/vandalism from temporary accounts. Magitroopa (talk) 11:52, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Semi-protection for two weeks. High level of IP vandalism and emotions following the tournament final last Sunday. Jeppiz (talk) 14:29, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive IP editing on BLP and personal attacks on the talk page, from multiple IPs, since at least Oct 2025. Dialectric (talk) 14:42, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing. Sugar Tax (talk) 15:42, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    User(s) blocked: ~2026-42936-4 (talk · contribs) blocked by HJ Mitchell. Favonian (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: IP vandalism/ WP:BLP violations JimRenge (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Already protected by administrator Acroterion. Favonian (talk) 17:01, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Tim (talk) 16:10, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Unsourced edits ~2026-43344-5 (talk) 16:17, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Unsourced edits. ~2026-43344-5 (talk) 16:25, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: The article concerns a politically sensitive region with ongoing conflict. Kurdish-related content has been repeatedly disputed and changed, leading to edit warring and unsourced or biased edits. Temporary protection is requested to maintain stability and neutrality. KurdistanRising (talk) 17:48, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: IP vandalism regarding the legality of the US agreement to respect Denmark's right to Greenland in return for sovereignty over the Virgin Islands. Mozitor (talk) 17:52, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Reason: Requesting temporary semi-protection due to persistent unsourced changes to this biography's personal life section, made from single-purpose temporary accounts. Flibirigit (talk) 18:10, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. — Sadko (words are wind) 18:15, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Extended confirmed protection: Persistent vandalism – Contentious topics enforcement for WP:CT/SA. Niasoh ❯❯❯ Wanna chat? 18:27, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for reduction in protection level

    Request removal of protection from a page, or reducing the current 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.

    Reason: To align the section wording with WP:NPOV (Neutral Point of View). The current phrasing includes 'puffery' terms that do not meet encyclopedic standards. The proposed changes use more objective, descriptive language supported by the cited references." ~2026-43295-8 (talk) 15:38, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Not done – Block evaders need not apply. Favonian (talk) 16:08, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Current requests for edits to a protected page

    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

    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.

    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.


    Looking to have this edit placed on the Talk page for Kosovo.

    The section 'History,' subsection 'Kosovo War,' second paragraph, last sentence:

    'By 1996, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), an ethnic Albanian guerrilla paramilitary group that sought the separation of Kosovo and the eventual creation of a Greater Albania,[121] had prevailed over the Rugova's non-violent resistance movement and launched attacks against the Yugoslav Army and Serbian police in Kosovo, resulting in the Kosovo War.[117][122]'

    I'm struggling to understand the use of 'the Rugova's' - it seems like an error. Could this perhaps be referring to Rugova and his wife (or even brother, other family member) working in tandem towards their movement? (e.g. JFK and RFK during JFK's presidency - 'The Kennedy's')

    Or, is error the precedent 'the,' and Rugova was a singular figure leading said movement?

    Cheers Kolcun (talk) 05:29, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Updating outdated statistics with the latest year-end data. ~2026-43295-8 (talk) 15:32, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Not done – Block evaders need not apply. Favonian (talk) 16:07, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

    Under History->Treaty of Kiel to World War II, please add: In 1916, as part of the Treaty of the Danish West Indies, the United States agreed to cede their interests in the whole of Greenland to Denmark, in return for the sale and sovereignty over the Danish Virgin Islands, henceforth known as the US Virgin Islands. https://web.archive.org/web/20210508035941/https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1917/d881 https://docs.pca-cpa.org/2016/01/a312b00b-us-denmark-treaty-of-the-danish-west-indies-1916.pdf

    Mozitor (talk) 18:25, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    

    Handled requests

    A historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.