ވިކިޕީޑިއާ:Protected page

ވިކިޕީޑިއާ އިންވިކިޕީޑިއާ

Administrators have the ability to "protect" pages or images so that they cannot be modified except by other admins (the link "މި ޞަފްޙާއަށް އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ" is replaced by a link "މަސްދަރު ބައްލަވާ" when viewed by non-admins). This ability is only to be used in limited circumstances.

Admins must not protect pages they are actively engaged in editing, except in the case of simple vandalism.

Articles linked from the main page should NOT be protected (full or semi) except to clean up vandalism. Protection should be kept to 10-15 minutes in these cases.
  1. Do not edit a temporarily protected page except to add a protected page notice.
  2. Do not protect a page on which you are involved in an edit dispute (Category:Conflicts).

See Wikipedia:Protection policy for more detailed advice and the purpose of protected pages.

  1. Protect the page, supplying a reason.
  2. Add {{protected}} (or {{vprotected}} for vandalism) to the top of the temporarily protected page and make mention of the protection in the edit summary.
  3. List pages you protect on Wikipedia:Protected page; if it is protected due to a conflict, you may want to list all user names/IPs involved in the conflict.
    Please use {{article|ARTICLE NAME}} when listing a page at Wikipedia:Protected page, where ARTICLE NAME is the article or page you wish to protect.
  4. Consider encouraging a resolution between the disputing parties.
  5. Remove the protection (while supplying a reason) once the conflict has been resolved.
  6. Remove {{protected}} from the top of an unprotected page and make mention of the removal in the edit summary.

See meta:Protected pages considered harmful, meta:edit wars

If you protect a page, or find a protected page not listed here, please add it below, to the appropriate sections. Please also add a short description of ten words or less indicating why you protected it. If you need to say more, discuss on the talk page of the page you protected. Also see the protection log for recent unprotections, which replaces the manual list of recently unprotected pages. The {{protected}} header automatically adds Category:Protected to the page, adding it to the Category's listing.

Pages protected due to WP:OFFICE guidelines[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Per Jimbo Wales, some articles are being protected by User:Danny due to complaints at Wikimedia's office. Please do not unprotect these without asking Danny first

Pages protected only against moves[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Please ensure that you add

{{moveprotected}} to the top of a move-locked page. New protections should be added at the bottom of this list.

Pages protected due to edit wars or vandalism[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

This list always needs pruning. Wikipedia works perfectly fine on a protection cycle of less than one week. Please examine older listings and unprotect if at all possible. If you add an article here, please remember to check the talk page frequently, and always consider removing protection as soon as possible.

Real articles[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Full protection[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

e ,efvqbjlsqd,dbakadqqbvsjhvsafe also Category:Protected, Category:Protected against vandalism and Protection log

Latest at the bottom, please; and please sign all entries so we know how old they are.

Please ensure that you add one of the following templates at the top of a protected page:
{{protected}} or

{{vprotected}} in the case of vandalism.

12 Feb and before[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]
Not encouraging =( · Katefan0(scribble)/poll 17:13, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
13 Feb to 19 Feb[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]
20 Feb to 26 Feb[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Semi-protection[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

See also Category:Semi-protected and Protection log

Latest at the bottom, please; and please sign all entries so we know how old they are.

Please ensure that you add {{sprotected}} at the top of the semi-protected page.

12 Feb and before[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]
13 Feb to 19 Feb[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]
20 Feb to 26 Feb[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Pages protected against spambot[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

See Category:Protected against spambots

Other[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Note:Pages protected against recreation should be placed at Wikipedia:List_of_pages_protected_against_re-creation

  • ފަންވަތް:Ln One editor making repeated tiny edits to heavily used template. Have left note on editor's page, suggesting he needs to work on a copy in the sandbox, rather than on the template itself. Should think this only needs to be a brief protection. 00:42, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Ln: Edit war on whether to link to a list of times the admin has been blocked. — FREAK OF NURxTURE (TALK) 03:56, Jan. 8, 2006
  • ފަންވަތް:Ln: Edit war on the icon: flag or map. The map doesn't look right, but the flag is a problem for political reasons. For now, it has no icon - hopefully a equitable solution will be found soon, but the temperature is more than a little warm on the talk page. Grutness...wha? 05:15, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article - full protection from Ardenn (talk contribs) changing the closing admin's decision text. I'll remove the protection in 15 minutes when Ardenn has cooled down, hopefully. Update - Not sure the user has agreed to not change it if I unprotect, so leaving protected for now. Should be minimal inpact, since it shouldnt be being changed anyhow. --Syrthiss 22:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Image:Turks2.jpg - edit war on Turkish people spilled over to this image. howcheng {chat} 00:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Image:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad drawings.jpg - a hugely controversial image undergoing repeated vandalism from multiple sources. This will almost certainly need to be protected for a long time - perhaps permanently, given the degree of animosity involved. -- ChrisO 21:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Category:Chinese_newspapers - many edits in this category which was voted for deletion are being used as evidence in a pending arbitration case. I restored the deletion and protected the page while the case is being deliberated. After it has been concluded the protection can be removed and the category deleted. --Wgfinley 13:47, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Ln: Semiprotected. Talk header template with moderate visibility, repeatedly vandalized by anons. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 03:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Images protected while on the Main Page[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Images on the main page often become the target of vandalism, particularly being overwritten with shock site images, which harms the credibility of the project due to that page's extreme visibility. Also, it takes some time for sysops to determine what caused a main page change. As such, images have begun to be protected during their time there, and this has become a de facto policy since the second or third week of November 2004.

In order to keep track of these images, please add {{ProtectedMainPageImage}} to them. This will add the image to Category:Protected main page images. There are typically 4 to 5 images on the main page, although some of them may be from the Wikicommons.

User pages sometimes become targets for vandalism, and may be protected upon request of the user associated with the page if this is a serious problem. Clear evidence can be seen from a user's history of the page, and their history from their discussion page.

By software configuration, script files (*.js) and stylesheets (*.css) in user spaces are protected such that only the user or an administrator can edit it.

Full protection[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

--HappyCamper 21:34, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Semi-protected[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Protected user subpages and boilerplates[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Some users have created boilerplate pages in their user namespace and protected them from editing. The appropriateness of doing this is disputed.

User talk pages: Registered users[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

User talk pages should only be protected in cases of persistent vandalism, and then only for as brief a period as possible. Please use the template

{{Usertalk-sprotect}} to mark such pages. This adds the page to Category:Semi-protected user and user talk pages.

  • ފަންވަތް:Article — temp. protected so that user can cool down and refrain adding further personal attacks. --Madchester 18:32, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article — blocked for one hour; personal attacks continue on the talk page, now protected. Someone else should look into it and implement unprotetion whenever they see fit. El_C 01:47, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article — user blocked for a week for personal attacks, continued on his Talk page, so protection applied. To be removed at end of block. — Matt Crypto 16:24, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article. User banned by arbcom for a year, but exploits the mediawiki 1.5 misfeature to converse with sockpuppets. Thrydulf 21:59, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article - protected from the potential vandalism that the return of Wik/Gzornenplatz would almost certainly bring out. - Lucky 6.9 05:04, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article The user has been banned for one year, but due to the block function's design he is still able to edit his talk page, which he blanked. To my knowledge, banning does not allow for any editing whatsoever, so there is no lgetimate reason for User:Skyring to edit the page. -Willmcw 00:16, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article If you know who Tern is, you know why its protected. Redwolf24 (talk) 23:23, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article perm banned user for various offenses ranging from posting a list of Jewish wikipedians to posting instructions on how to best disrupt wikipedia using open proxies. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 20:29, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article Banned user MilkMan posting too many personal attacks on the user talk page. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:04, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article Banned by the ArbCom for one year for leagal treates, continued vandalism and legal threats as an IP on page.--nixie 01:38, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article - user has been permanently blocked from editing and their user talk page has become a gamut of threats against other users: have protected to stop others appearing. -- Francs2000 00:36, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article - indefinitely blocked sock puppet of user:Zephram Stark; was using his talk page after the block to continue stirring up trouble. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:02, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article - using talk page after indefinite block for rantings and personal attacks. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 18:43, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article - indefinite blocked user, continuously ranting about the system and the admins. Jtkiefer T | @ | C ----- 20:26, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article – Indefinitely blocked troll (banned by admin consensus) who recently edited his own talk page in order to create the impression that he's still active. --MarkSweep 07:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article - legal threats (IP is blocked). --fvw* 19:56, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article - getting indefinitely blocked didn't appear to phase this user who just carried on regardless on their talk page -- Francs2000 13:52, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article Anonymous IP repeatedly blanking page to remove warnings and notices from administrators. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:27, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article is the talk page of a permanently banned user who seems to still be able to edit the page and make threats. Not any more. Back to the wiki-vacation. - Lucky 6.9 20:58, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article - blocked enviroknot sockpuppet posting rants and flames. —Charles P. (Mirv) 23:05, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article permablocked impostor keeps changing this page into a redir. Owen× 00:24, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article Was warned repeatedly not to blank talk page, but continued to do so. --Shanel 02:32, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article blocked user continues offensive remarks on Talk page. Owen× 23:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article The North Carolina vandal, after his IP range ( was shut down, changing the various warning notices to abusive this-and-that. Can be unprotected shortly since the range block will expire later tonight. Antandrus (talk) 03:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article is semiprotected because of an anon AOL ip vandal. The 15 minute blocks AOL's get doesn't seem to be discouraging the vandalism (nor did a 45) so trying this instead. Lifted protection from the talk page so test the waters. --Syrthiss 19:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC) (updated, page has been protected since Jan 6th)
  • ފަންވަތް:Article is semiprotected for repeated removal/replacement by profanities of warnings and block notices. User indefinitely blocked by Curps for vandalism, and for 2 hours by Lupin. -- Arwel (talk) 23:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • User_talk:Nicodemus75- blocked user using his talk page for vicious personal attacks. Dmcdevit·t 19:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • User_talk:Beckjord being used to continue to edit despite his one year arbcom ban. Dmcdevit·t 23:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
  • User talk:Zen-master being used to continue to edit despite his one year arbcom ban. Dmcdevit·t 23:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
  • User talk:SPUI. User was give a short ban by arbitration committee for putting an unsuitable userbox on his userpage. During the ban, he has placed a copy of it on his talk page. This has been reverted and the page has been protected under a vprotect template. --Tony Sidaway 23:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

User talk pages: Anonymous users[އުނިއިތުރު ގެންނަވާ]

Talk pages of anonymous users should generally only be semi-protected. This prevents a vandal from blanking warnings etc., but still allows non-admin RC patrollers to issue warnings on this page. Please use the template
{{Usertalk-sprotect}} to mark such pages. This adds the page to Category:Semi-protected user and user talk pages. Please use the

{{vandal}} tag (replacing " " with "_" as appropriate).