Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase
Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
| Requests for page protection | |
|---|---|
|
You are currently viewing the subpage "Current requests for increase in protection level". Request protection of a page, or increasing the protection level
| |
- Shawarma (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs): Repeated removal of Israel and on-and-off "Arab" cuisine stable mentions
Reason: Good evening, I'm ShawarmaFan07, very recently, I have been witnessing several edit-warring on and off due to the following things; neither of which are ethical. There had been removals of Israel's style of cooking that dish, and this is not appropriate to transfer the Israel-Palestine conflict online as it is not necessary and promotes racism. Furthermore, there had been arguments to whether or not shawarma is just an Arab dish or generally Middle Eastern; with mentions of Israel, Turkey and Georgia, it is appropriate to say that it is a general Middle Eastern food, nevertheless, there are edits that continue to revert back into calling the dish "Arab". I also suspect that this editing conflict will continue. Using the talk page to gain consensus did not help as I had no response for the past several minutes, but I have been accused of inappropriately edit warring, despite revert back to the correct edits of how shawarma is a general Middle Eastern dish (again, due to Israel and Turkey consuming it). So I suggest that there should be protection for this sub to prevent further conflicts. Of course, in general, using Wikipedia for any personal attack is not appropriate. Any of your suggestions and actions will be great. Thank you! ShawarmaFan07 (talk) 20:02, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I do not think the article needs protection at this point. Ymblanter (talk) 21:29, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Persistent edit warring; addition of unsourced content. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 21:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement – Article not about the conflict, but edits have come up that relate to WP:ARBPIA3#500/30. Jalen Barks (Woof) 21:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – IPs continuing to add FANCRUFT and unnecessary descriptors despite reverts and warnings. Last IP has long talk page warnings and previous blocks. CNMall41 (talk) 22:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. Filmssssssssssss (talk) 23:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Request indefinite semi-protection for the same reason Neolithodes was given it several days ago: persistent sockpuppet vandalism (IPs and burner accounts) from an extremely persistent editor from the Philippines. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 23:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Not to mention this vulgar WP:NPA statement in Cebuano: [1] Borgenland (talk) 03:12, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent disruptive editing - IP editors keep changing a fictional character named 'Jack Black' to wikilink to the actor Jack Black, despite reverts & a hidden note explaining that the character and the actor are not related. Waxworker (talk) 23:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent nonconstructive editing by IP users in the past couple weeks. Bridget (talk) 00:12, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite create protection: Repeatedly recreated – LTA. TyphoonAmpil (💬 - 📝) 01:16, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: There is a high level of trolling and restated arguments on the talk page. The article is extended confirmation protected, and the talk page will become very important when the election occurs, to gain consensus on calling states. I'm requesting semi-protection for the talk page until say January 21, 2025. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 02:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please enforce WP:CT/AP. IanDBeacon (talk) 03:28, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Per WP:CT/A-I.Pachu Kannan (talk) 02:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Persistent addition of nonsense edits by random IPs. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. This has only occurred once in the last two months. Talk pages are protected only in exceptional circumstances and one instance of vandalism in two months is not exceptional. Chetsford (talk) 05:20, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: WP:BFDI 67.209.129.62 (talk) 03:09, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: WP:BFDI 67.209.129.62 (talk) 03:14, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: There had been records of vandalism due to the tension of the Matt vs WPEngine situation, and is likely to be subjected to continued vandalism until this situation can be concluded and properly documented,. Requesting protection from unregistered and new users Alexllte (talk) 05:20, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent disruptive edits and vandalism. Yuvaank (talk) 06:32, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Recurrent attempts to make unsourced blp over this appropriate redirect. PamD 07:45, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of one year, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Chetsford (talk) 08:58, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 09:39, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite extended confirmed protection: Arbitration enforcement. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 09:42, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary full protection: The revision history much speaks for itself. Also, the case was on WP:AN/EW just yesterday[2], and it still goes on. Note also the WP:CLEANHANDS issue noted by the closer in AN/EW. Austronesier (talk) 10:43, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's sad, but as one of the other principal editors involved, I would support this request at this point. Vlaemink (talk) 11:32, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Vlaemink: It wouldn't be necessary if you could prove to take a step back for a moment without waiting to be forced to... Consensus isn't built in an hour (and it's not built by mere assumption of implicit consensus), but you repeatedly create fait accomplis. –Austronesier (talk) 11:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Austronesier: Please do not make it seem as if I am the only one to blame for the current predicament, you know this isn't true; and I'm not supporting you so that I will be forced to take a step back. I'm supporting your request so that De Wikischim will prevented from editing the article while major discussions take place on talk. Vlaemink (talk) 12:01, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Vlaemink: It wouldn't be necessary if you could prove to take a step back for a moment without waiting to be forced to... Consensus isn't built in an hour (and it's not built by mere assumption of implicit consensus), but you repeatedly create fait accomplis. –Austronesier (talk) 11:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)