This username matched "Used k instead of c attempting to skip filter: f\.?c\.?$. Violating string: zeynepelfc" on the blacklist. -- DQB (owner / report) 15:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Note on file "FC" is an abbreviation of "Football Club" -- DQB (owner / report) 15:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
This is nothing to do with a football club - they've translated an article about some Turkish/Syrian NGO thing. Secretlondon (talk) 19:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Not a blatant violation of the username policy. Please discuss this with the user first, and consider opening a community discussion at Requests for comment/User names if they disagree with your concerns., not great, but with the age and activity I'm not comfortable with a block at this point. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
@Remsense: This user has over 600 edits since account creation in 2007. Did you try discussing your concerns with the user? Ks0stm(T•C•G•E) 01:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
They've already stated that I shouldn't consider the username a problem on their page, so I assume their perspective wouldn't be different upon being asked. Remsense诉 01:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
It was discussed a little on the user's talk page in 2014 after being blocked, and the admin opted to remove their own block. I think that should mean this be considered resolved. 331dot (talk) 07:06, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Agreed. Ten years later this is less taboo anyway. Secretlondon (talk) 12:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Reason: High level of IP vandalism, deleting well-sourced criticism, potential COI editing, etc. Félix An (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only one IP edit this month, and that was four days ago. Favonian (talk) 11:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Edit warring between autoconfirmed users (and one IP). Requesting temporary ECP. RomeshKubajali (talk) 12:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Automated comment: A request for protection/unprotection for one or more pages in this request was recently made, and was denied at some point within the last 8 days.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 12:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Reason: High amount of unconfirmed edits from ip users, to much vandalism DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 12:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Unless I am missing something, there has not been an edit since late December 2023. -- LuK3(Talk) 12:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – Anonymous IP has reverted edits two times, it will undoubtedly continue. Trying to avoid edit warring. skarz (talk) 14:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
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.
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.
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 ITalk to my owner:Online 20:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Regarding Kate Ryan, I have removed the semi-protection as that was what was intended.@Deb: Would you be open to removing the semi-protection here and seeing how it fares under pending-changes? It has been five-and-a-half years since your protection. Sdrqaz (talk) 02:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Reason: The protection is no longer necessary because .......many users want to add more information to this page. 103.19.48.97 (talk) 09:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Not unprotected – Please use an edit request to request specific changes to be made to the protected page. Talk:Chitral is not protected. Favonian (talk) 11:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among ((Edit protected)), ((Edit template-protected)), ((Edit extended-protected)), or ((Edit semi-protected)) to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
Change "Since the start of the Israeli operation, more than 35,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed,[86] including over 15,000 children and 10,000 women.[87][88]" to "Since the start of the Israeli operation, nearly 35,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed,[86] including over 7,000 children and nearly 5,000 women.[87][88]." This is based on the data recently revised by the UN, accessible here: https://www.ochaopt.org/content/hostilities-gaza-strip-and-israel-reported-impact-day-215. ConDissenter (talk) 21:21, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Is there another place to request this change? The talk page for Israel-Hamas war is restricted as well. The current source for casualty data is palinfo.com, which describes itself by saying it "does not lay any claim to neutrality for it blatantly sides with the oppressed Palestinian people." https://english.palinfo.com/about-us/. Recognizing that reliable sources do not need to have a neutral POV, why should we use this as a source rather than a less biased source like the United Nations? ConDissenter (talk) 18:28, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
@ConDissenter Please go check Talk:Israel–Hamas war for earlier discussions and to see why your request is unlikely to succeed. FYI, the lower numbers refer not to the killed overall but to the killed who have additionally been identified by name. Besides, all the numbers are sourced to Gaza MoH anyway. — kashmīrīTALK 09:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, Kashmiri. I recognize the data is all coming from the same place. (I've tried to access but can't find a reliable site for the Gaza Health Ministry to find the data directly, so I assume the UN is accurately presenting the data.) I agree it hasn't changed the total number killed which is why I didn't suggest a change to that -- beyond fixing the "more than" to "nearly" 35,000. But I don't see any basis for keeping outdated numbers on women and children. The old ratio was 72% and the new ratio was 52%. The talk page suggests we need to wait for more RS, but at this point there are plenty:
Automated comment: This user who requested protection has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 01:28, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Not done – The article is not currently protected, but you are temporarily blocked for edit warring on that article! Favonian (talk) 11:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Protected by Mifter on 2017-03-25: "Considering the main page was unprotected by a compromised sysop semi recently, perhaps transcluding it to a cascade protected page will provide a small increase in protection"
Protected by Mifter on 2017-03-25: "Considering the main page was unprotected by a compromised sysop semi recently, perhaps transcluding it to a cascade protected page will provide a small increase in protection"
Warned user. Ad Orientem (talk) 23:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
