Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit
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. - Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the
{{Edit COI}}template should be used. - Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
- 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.
| Requests for page protection | |
|---|---|
|
You are currently viewing the subpage "Current requests for edits to a protected page". Before listing a request here, please make a request on the protected page's talk page. Click here to return to Requests for page protection. Request a specific edit to a protected page
Please request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here | |
There are reports of the new regime in Syria allowing Israeli jets to use its airspace, so Syria could now be listed as 'support' or 'proxy' on Israel's behalf. Israeli leaders have made no secret that they played a role in the dismantlement of the Assad regime through the weakening of Hezbollah, and deterring Iranian planes.
Additionally, there are allegations of unofficial support from Iraqi Kurdish groups and relations with Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran, as well as back-channel support from Azerbaijan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco.
Germany supports Israel and Merz has made that clear. Italy also supports. Probably limited Canadian and Australian support too. While, the Netherlands and Denmark also participated in "Operation Prosperity Guardian" in the Red Sea against the Houthis in Yemen.
On the other hand, Iran is supported by Iraq, Qatar, Turkey, Russia, North Korea, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
It is not 'just' Israel and its Western allies and anti-regime Iranian proxies against the Iranian regime and its proxies in Gaza, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen, but politically it is much more nuanced and many other countries are definitely involved here behind-the-scenes. 188.214.15.197 (talk) 15:05, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Edit requests to that article should follow the WP:EDITXY guidelines because it is covered by 'contentious topics' rules. If the proposed changes do not follow those guidelines there is almost no chance that they will be implemented. And any claim should be accompanied by reliable sourcing that supports the claim. Sean.hoyland (talk) 15:33, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
The Israeli casaulties have changed over the night with new Iranian strikes. I want to change the Current Casaulties from 24 Killed to 53, i have the sources needed. And to change the 2,345 injured to 2,585 injured for which i also have sources. Pkk123477 (talk) 18:53, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Including this : " the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) found Iran non-compliant with its nuclear obligations for the first time in 20 years." has no bearing in the conflict per-se and is misleading the reader, as it just reads as a excuse for Israel assassinations
Moreso when :
There's no mention of the IAEA and CIA confirming Iran's claims of NOT working towards a Nuclear Weapon, while the US President publicly dismissed both reports ( Wich gives them credibility beyond doubt ) . These reports long predates the first Israel attack in the current War.
These news are all over internet by now. Shouldnt be hard to find sources, but i can do it easily.
I believe it should be noted in the opening of the article, as it is Israel's Claim/Excuse to attack Iran and it is being refuted by every involved party.
Removing/swaping the extract i quoted with the original reports will reflect the real ( reported ) status of the issue, and not just a narrative pushed by one side. 181.116.43.82 (talk) 04:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
I suggest removing the Npov, non-neutral edit: "Legal scholars saw the Israeli strikes as a violation of international law".
The reason for this is in the source itself, which claims a legal dispute. Therefore, presenting a specific legal side contradicts the principle of neutrality. I will note that a search of the Internet reveals two or three specific individuals with this opinion. I will note that the source talks about a publication on CNN as a fact. I will add that Israeli intelligence thought differently from the American one and accordingly there is a legal difference. I will note that from my memory such an assessment was not mentioned until after the bombing, the lengths were shorter. For example, this report in Hebrew, citing the New Times: https://mobile.mako.co.il/news-world/2025_q1/Article-0f2f019ebfdc491026.htm I will also mention this article that defines an attack on a nuclear reactor as an example of a justified preemptive attack: Shue, Henry and Rhodin, David (2007). Preemption: Military Action and Moral Justification. Oxford University Press. p. 215.
Thank you in advance for your help and contribution to the free encyclopedia. 2A0D:6FC7:625:CDDE:594:A0C2:4FB1:9C04 (talk) 10:04, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
There is a chance that the incident is relevant to the article. North Korea is an ally of Iran. It has launched a nuclear program and American intelligence has had to deal with it. There have been talks with it.
I will add information from the article [1]: "The main dilemma in the field of nuclear arms control in the world today is related to the challenge of outlining policy effective, aimed at preventing the acquisition of nuclear weapons by new states determined to develop a military nuclear capability. These are states that launched covert military nuclear programs while they were members of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) — Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, but also Libya and Syria. These are states that explicitly denied that they were working to acquire a military nuclear capability but at the same time they exploited the weakness of the treaty's provisions and promoted military programs. This activity constituted a violation of the express commitment to remain non-nuclear, while pretending to uphold that very commitment. This unique situation made it very difficult for the powerful international actors tasked with upholding the treaty to effectively confront the nuclear ambitions of these states." For example, in the case of Iran, enrichment was at a level of 60%, enrichment that has no civilian uses, [2], [3] and the AMAD Project that provided the Iranians with knowledge [4] and was discontinued. In the Korean case, the military aspects are quite clear. Enrichment was carried out, plutonium and finally ballistic missiles (Iran already has them) [https://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5067651,00.html]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a0d:6fc0:99b:3900:9990:d2e8:cbb5:ce37 (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
NCRI Report: Iran’s Covert Nuclear Warhead Program and Missile Sites Exposed https://www.ncr-iran.org/en/news/nuclear/ncri-report-irans-covert-nuclear-warhead-program-and-missile-sites-exposed/
“Twenty years ago, Iran knew how to build a bomb,” Inbar said. “They built all the components, except for the nuclear core itself — at least that’s what’s known.” “Many of Iran’s facilities haven’t been examined by the International Atomic Energy Agency. If you’re only invited to see part of the program and can’t access key military sites, you don’t know what’s happening.”
https://www.timesofisrael.com/could-irans-missiles-carry-nuclear-warheads-an-expert-breaks-down-the-threat/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a0d:6fc0:99b:3900:9990:d2e8:cbb5:ce37 (talk) 13:47, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
I would like to request that... (Your edit request here) . 149.22.219.132 (talk) 10:15, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
I have 2 edit requests, but am posting them here as I can't use the talk page
1. According to the BBC, the Iranian government has released updated casualty figures claiming that 430 have been killed, I was wondering if these should be added to the casualties and losses section.
2. Also according to the BBC, the IDF claims to have killed Quds force commander Saeed Izadi, and head of Quds force unit 190 Behnam Shahryari. If true, shouldn't they be added to the list of Iranian commanders and notable casualties section?
Also can we please make the talk page more accessible for editors, I understand why it's protected, but it's preventing lots of editors from making genuine edit requests and making adding factuality to the article much less efficient.