Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Decrease
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.
| Requests for page protection | |
|---|---|
|
Click here to return to Requests for page protection. Request removal of protection from a page, or reducing the current protection level
| |
Reason: The protection is no longer necessary because the article Bengal_Files is extended confirmed protected. I am unable to create an account and so, I am forced to post here with my IP address being shown (my IP is partially blocked but that is not due to my edits). More people need to post on the Talk page, especially since an Admin has said that an RfC can be started (as some editors have added unsourced content to the article and people need to object or support that)....... . 2409:40F2:216B:3F9A:94B6:1BFF:FE43:3CCE (talk) 04:39, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This user who requested protection has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 04:56, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- Part of the reason the talk page was protected was to enforce WP:ARBIMH#Indian military history extended-confirmed restriction against IP editors, so I am sceptical this can be challenged here (it's technically Arbitration Enforcement and therefore can't be unilaterally overturned). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 15:25, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
Not done – Muboshgu (talk) 15:32, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
Not unprotected but you can propose an edit request to the article at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit. Note that the people monitoring that page will not serve as proxies to make an end-run around the protection, and will not post comments in your behalf, so your proposal must be well-formed and cite reliable sources. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:57, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
Reason: The protection was put in place because too many people were referring to the suspect by name on the talk page while an rfc was ongoing to decide if the name should be included, said rfc finished and concluded it will be listed in the article. There is no need to worry about people putting his name on the talk page now. LachlanTheUmUlGiTurtle (talk) 15:21, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- Pinging protecting admin Fuzheado. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:32, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
Reason: This user's talk was protected indefinitely in 2010, when they themself were blocked. Apparently at that time Rossdegenstein was using IPs to evade blocks to edit their own talk page. As they were unblocked in 2012, and have never been blocked since, I don't see any reason for the protection to remain...and I want to leave them a message. 96.79.116.169 (talk) 17:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)