Wikipedia talk:Protection policy

This page is not for proposing or discussing edits to protected pages. To request or propose a change to a page that you are not able to edit, place a message on its talk page. If the page is fully protected, you may attract the attention of an admin to make the change by placing the {{edit fully-protected}} template above your request. Requests placed here will probably be removed or ignored. If the page in question and its talk page are both protected please make your edit request at Wikipedia:Request for edit. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, see Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. To suggest that a move-protected page be renamed, see Wikipedia:Requested moves. To request that a deleted page protected against re-creation be re-created or restored, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. For information about protecting the main page featured article or other featured content, see Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Protection policy page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Shortcuts WT:PROTECT WT:PPOL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 2 months

This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Counter-Vandalism Unit This page is within the scope of the Counter-Vandalism Unit, a WikiProject dedicated to combating vandalism on Wikipedia. You can help the CVU by watching the recent changes and undoing unconstructive edits. For more information go to the CVU's home page or see cleaning up vandalism.Counter-Vandalism UnitWikipedia:Counter-Vandalism UnitTemplate:Counter-Vandalism UnitCounter-Vandalism Unit

The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wikipedia. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic.

This page is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Fix the redirect links that lead you to a redirect page to instead be the redirected page (not the redirection page)? Alimsts (talk) 13:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

shortcut links i mean Alimsts (talk) 13:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Alimsts: Are you commenting about the protection policy? If yes, which links are an issue? Daniel Quinlan (talk) 01:38, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why are the links in shortcut boxes leading to redirect pages but the redirect shows a link instead of actually taking you there? Alimsts (talk) 09:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on I get it they loop round Alimsts (talk) 09:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When the link in the box takes you to the redirect page, this is an intentional feature of Template:Shortcut, and is nothing to do with the protection policy. Changes to that template should be suggested at its talk page, because this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia:Protection policy page.

The behaviour of the redirect page itself is coded into the MediaWiki software at a fairly fundamental level; and not only is that also out of scope for this page, it is nothing that we can alter anywhere within Wikipedia. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:36, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

👍 Alimsts (talk) 07:53, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Extended confirmed definition. It is a proposal to change WP:XC from 500 edits + 30 days to 500 edits + 90 days. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per remedy 5 of Indian military history arbitration case, I would suggest ammending text to reflect that admins can preemptively protect pages in topics authorised by arbitration remedy under the preemptive protection section:

Stylez995 (talk) 13:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As this entire section is already about exceptions to preemtion, perhaps just simplifying to: "Pages subject to Arbitration Committee protection remedies are also an exception." ? — xaosflux ^Talk 13:50, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can keep it simple in a way that reduces the chances we'll need to revisit the wording in the future. I would recommend Pages subject to Arbitration Committee remedies that permit or require preemptive protection may be protected accordingly. The permit or require could even be shortened to authorize, but I think permit or require is a bit clearer. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 22:24, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and made the change. I added the word "Finally" at the start of the sentence to improve the flow and I also updated the footnote (rather than try to update the policy for every future Arbitration Committee decision, I just linked WP:GS which people tend to update long before this policy). Daniel Quinlan (talk) 05:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]