Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Decrease

Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.

• To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
• Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
• Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
• If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.

Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

Requests for page protection
Click here to return to Requests for page protection. Request unprotection of a page, or reducing the protection level Request unprotection

Draft:Lifespan Integration

• Draft:Lifespan Integration (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: Full creation protection seems unjustified. The corresponding mainspace page is unprotected and no one has recreated it. I personally do not intend to create an article on this topic but in case an autoconfirmed editor does, it would be reasonable to drop the SALT level to semi to match mainspace. Protecting admin has been desysoped so I brought it here directly. Nickps (talk) 11:54, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

@Nickps: The SALT does seem justifiable, given three speedy deletions. I do agree with you that full-protection is unnecessary for it, however. Semi-protection would seem to me to be too low; maybe XCP? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 15:44, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Even that sounds wrong to me to be honest. Protecting the draft but not the mainspace article is a weird thing to do. It's essentially directing any spam to mainspace. Since there has been no such spam all this time, I'd argue that the protection has outlived its purpose. But, lowering the protection would still be a positive in any case so I won't get too hung up on the level. Do XCP if you think it's right. Nickps (talk) 16:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't look like there's been any attempt to re-create the mainspace page after the AfD (which, I should note, post-dates the most recent draft deletion). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:33, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Meh This is one of those cases who pop up from time to time where I am always on the fence. Yes, the page shouldn't be protected anymore (or only at lower level); on the other hand there is no expressed need to create a page under said draft. Lectonar (talk) 07:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Charles Banner

• Personal Life (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: The protection is no longer necessary because the edits were correct and not vandalism. Charles has three children, not two, and he did divorce Tetyana and had a relationship with someone else with whom he shares a child and whom he left mid-pregnancy. He wants to hide this information because he wants a picture perfect bio but people deserve to know the truth about their politicians. 2A00:23EE:2218:FD3:A528:9F83:6245:898B (talk) 18:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Not unprotected – Please use an edit request to request specific changes to be made to the protected page. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

january 20

• January 20 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The article is simultaneously semi-protected as well as pending protected, both with indefinite deadlines. I thought there should be only one type of edit-protection, if not one indefinite and the other time-based like the page kate Ryan.102.159.242.79 (talk) 20:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

• Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

All Nickelodeon Kids' Choice Awards ceremonies articles between 2005 and 2018

• 2005 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2006 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2008 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2009 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2010 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2011 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2013 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2014 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2015 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2016 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2017 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 2018 Kids' Choice Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Reason: Those pages have been protected by a user who is no longer active for the past 3 years. My question is, is the indefinite protection still necessary for the time being? I can already see that 2007 and 2012 editions have had their protection settings revoked. Furthermore, I checked the page logs of later ceremonial events and realized that they were protected at least once, except for the current year's page which is presently a redirect.102.159.242.79 (talk) 21:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)