Wikidata talk:Protection policy

Nicole Brenez

Please semi-protect this page. As you can see in the edit war, some IP's keeps removing the image-property. --1Veertje (talk) 09:00, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done for a week--Ymblanter (talk) 21:21, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't think that would be enough. As you can see in the edit history, this is a very persistent edit war that's been going for months. 1Veertje (talk) 07:02, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Added to the watchlist.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:35, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Suggest adding link to Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard

I propose we add something like:

To request page protection, use the Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard.

Bovlb (talk) 18:22, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

I've added some wording to that effect (and fixed the flow of the page). Does it look good to you? -- Ajraddatz (talk) 20:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Bovlb (talk) 00:24, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

protecting can protect moving a page

Is it? Thingofme (talk) 02:52, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

The degree of protection protects against all modifications by users whose status is concerned. Why this question, Thingofme? Can I help you? Or put a message on Wikidata:Project Chat. —Eihel (talk) 03:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Unprotection Request

here I request IPs be able to edit. The thread was live for 8 hours. Can you do anything here? 2600:387:5:80D:0:0:0:66 20:42, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 April 2020

Hi, I’d like to request block lengths be added and a link to bans. 2600:387:5:80D:0:0:0:66 21:21, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Redirect link

Protection should reply more to protecting people. This should have something else. 2600:387:5:80D:0:0:0:7A 23:19, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

This page is about page protection. You appear to want it to contain information about blocking, which is covered under Wikidata:Blocking policy, which is linked at the bottom of the page in the green box. Bovlb (talk) 23:42, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2020

Can you mention what happens if an admin edits an office protected page? 2600:387:5:80D:0:0:0:7A 13:55, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

This appears to be adequately covered by "In extremely rare circumstances the Wikimedia Foundation will protect a page as an office action (symbolized by a black lock). Office actions only occur as the result of a formal complaint made off-wiki, are always publicly declared as office actions, and are only done by members of the Wikimedia Foundation staff or its Board of Trustees. Office actions cannot be undone without the express permission of the Wikimedia Foundation. Administrators who do so without permission risk being summarily desysopped.". Do you have a specific proposed change? Bovlb (talk) 17:21, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bovlb: yes I do. On enwiki it says, “As outlined in Meta:Office actions#Use of advanced rights by Foundation staff, pages may be protected by Wikimedia Foundation staff in response to issues such as copyright infringement or libel. Such actions override community consensus. Administrators should not edit or unprotect such pages without permission from Wikimedia Foundation staff.” This means admins can’t EDIT, unless they have permission. It should be added here. 2600:387:5:80D:0:0:0:7A 18:13, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

For the convenience of others, this is a reference to en:Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Office_actions and, transiently, to meta:Office_actions#Use_of_advanced_rights_by_Foundation_staff. ENWP policies are not directly relevant here (except as examples), but this paragraph could perhaps benefit from a link to the meta page. I find it preferable to link to a central policy than to generate local interpretations on-the-fly. As far as I know, there has never been an OFFICE protection on this project (and I think there would be certain difficulties in enacting it, including the lack of Template:pp-office). Are these general suggestions motivated by a specific situation? Bovlb (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

No. But I noticed that on enwiki it says admins should not edit, nothing about editing here, which is mostly the problem. The Meta link also directly came over to CheckUser, a tool used to check two users via IPs, but the first link is definitely better for convinence, but still. I feel like here and on simplewiki protection is the same, but simple also has cascade.(Consider Extended Confirmed Protection). Anyway, that was really all I wanted to say, as I did think it was kinda weird how wikiPEDIA says something and not wikiDATA, note that I would bold/italicize it but I am on a mobile so I don’t have that kind of access. Thank you. @Bolvb: any objections to what I am saying? Note that I can’t say anything on enwiki as I was blocked by Favonian for a year, and two weeks ago ToBeFree reset the year long block to revoke TPA. 2600:387:5:805:0:0:0:74 4:45 pm, 18 April 2020 (UTC-4)

I see that your IP was part of a large block blocked on ENWP because of long-term abuse from multiple IP addresses. In general, blocks and blocking policy are handled separately on each project, and we discourage editors from importing problems from one project to another. Having said that, I have a few words of advice for you before leaving the subject. If you wish to appeal this ENWP block, you could try following the procedure described at en:Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System. Alternatively, if you are not the person whose behaviour resulted in the block, then you may create an account (see en:Wikipedia:Why create an account? and en:Wikipedia:Request an account). Bovlb (talk) 22:12, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bovlb: yes but it was a rangeblock-multiple ranged. BLP violations, block evaders, everything! It was at 6:45 PM Eastern(22:45)on March 13, 2020. Furthermore, I submitted many bad appeals so ToBeFree had to reset and revoke TPA on April 3, 2020 at 4:25 PM(20:25). I was ALSO blocked for LTA on Meta, and block evasion on simplewiki, anyway, I hope I won’t be blocked here. Have a good day. 2600:387:5:80D:0:0:0:BE 22:37, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Pages and items

For those unfamiliar with the wikibase sw, it may be unclear whether the term page cover also the items (properties or lexems). It may be useful to clarify that.--Jklamo (talk) 12:29, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Protection Request

Please protect Q16091438. Reason : 222.100.217.67 keeps vandalise this page. --Vanilie (talk) 22:28, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Protection Request

Please protect Q1922726 people keep removing the date it got abolished and merged into Q2419294. Jhowie Nitnek 15:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jhowie Nitnek: Please request the protection on Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Bonjour, le musée du cinéma de Bruxelles (rebaptisé « Cinematek » en 2009) a depuis toujours (1962) été la vitrine de la Cinémathèque royale de Belgique. Meilleures salutations, --94.108.4.93 17:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)