Request protection or unprotection here.
I request unprotection due to the fact that this is a free wiki and should express the (correct) opinion of the people. I also disagree with protecting this due to anyone can register, so what's the point. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harry Potter Fantic 1 (talk • contribs).
- What do you want unprotected? Also, this wiki isn't for expressing opinions (which, by the way, can neither be "correct" nor "incorrect"). John Reaves (talk) 02:14, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Ya, I don't get why you can't edit it because you can just log in and then edit it, and like John Reaves said it's a free wiki, so you should get to edit anyone you want.:) :) :) could you please unprotect it, i think that anyone with good information about a wiki should beable to edit it and put down there info..... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ancientwolf01 (talk • contribs).
- What page are you referring to? -- 00:05, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
Quick Question, It says for Semi-Protected pages, that new users cannot edit them. How long do you need to be a user to edit those certain pages?
I 've got a nice pic. of Draco cot during Slug party. Moreover i m a reg. member for voting. Can i edit the article? Pl. replay.Remusblack 19:10, December 13, 2009 (UTC)Remusblack 14:30, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
On the Lavener Brown page, the quote found in the beginning of the "third year" section was actually from the fourth book and should be either changed or a note should be stated telling the difference. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BetsyTeeHee (talk • contribs).
I see there are many pages that are major pages that are prone to vandalism, and they are indefinable. I was just wondering, of every page, why aren't the trio's pages protected? -- Ratneer Owl Me! 03:48, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
Please let the community add to this wealth of knowledge. Edit
There are more facts here than any one person could produce I feel that there could be more knowledge to be shared and restricting the flow and sharing of information as such is counterproductive to the main cause of this website. For instance there are several unanswered questions that have been addressed on different articles that i feel that i could personally shed some light on. I am sure that many other people feel the same way. Please allow us our freedom on sharing information (not opinions). Atleast have the additions or corrections be submitted to the admins for review before publication. This is the information age, let us use it to our advantage.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Beaten.loads.of.times (talk • contribs).
- Well, once you have 20 regular article edits you will be able to share what ever "information" you like on protected pages. So you don't have very much to do before adding this "information."--L.V.K.T.V.J.(Send an owl!) 18:57, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
please unprotect this page Edit
What is the point of protecting this page? Besides what about the picture of Richard Harris as dumbldore? he was important during 2001 and 2002. He is missed by a lot of Fans
please unprotect this page Edit
What is the point of protecting this page? Besides what about the picture of Richard Harris as Dumbldore? he was important during 2001 and 2002. He is missed by a lot of Fans. And I would advise that two pictures of Dumbldore one of each actor one Richard Harris and the other of the other actor!!!! I am very angry that theres no picture of Richard Harris as Dumbldore in the Beginning of the article and a picture of the new actor for Dumbldore as Well!! I forget who. But that is not my point. My point is Richard Harris Deserves credit too!! That's insulting his memory!!!
Marshall David Wahlstrom Helgren 07:03, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
Marsh Waha April 22, 2010
In the Ronald Weasley page, the "Also Known As" in the "Biographical Information" in the Infobox should be added by Rupert And Ralph.Mihir2000 09:35, November 17, 2010 (UTC)
The Severus Snape page
Ginerva Potter (nee weasley) Edit
Can you please unprotect the Ginny page because her eyes are hazel not brown check in the 7th book! deathly hallows! and also, i would like to know how long i have to be a member to edit a protected page. thx!:P:):D♥♥Melody Weasley 05:20, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
- You have to be autoconfirmed and have 20 edits. Also, Chapter 6 of Deathly Hallows, speaking of Mrs W. "He forced himself to look directly into her eyes, noticing as he did so that they were precisely the same shade of brown as Ginny's." Thanks, --JKoch(Owl Me!) 05:34, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Oh sry. :) my bad and thx!:P:):D♥♥Melody Weasley 03:18, December 6, 2010 (UTC)
How do get 'autoconfirmed'? Happychickenvermin 21:04, December 11, 2010 (UTC)
- What exactly are you requesting be unprotected? - Nick O'Demus 11:07, January 16, 2011 (UTC)
- Hello! Please unprotect the Ginny page. There is a bunch of information in there that is completely unfounded. For instance, in the article about what she looks like, an editor wrote that she had brown lips and no acne. Where did they get that information? It also says that Dean Thomas's favorite thing about her was that she was a good kisser. That's rubbish. It wasn't stated in any of the books. It is ridiculous that these pages can only be edited by certain people. Just because they've been users for longer does NOT mean that they know more about Harry Potter than we do. Thanks for reading.6684lillian 18:54, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
What's the point of being a member if you can't edit whatever you want?????????? Loony
- It looks like you made your account a little over an hour ago. So, Welcome to the Harry Potter Wiki! According to information higher on this page, you have to be an Autoconfirmed member (which automatically happens four days after you create your account), and you also have to have made 20 constructive edits before you can edit a semi-protected page. If you want to edit a fully protected page (something that has been locked so that only admins can edit it), you are welcome to bring it up in the talk page, adding a detailed description of what you want changed. An admin is likely to see it and make the change for you. Hope this helps The Knights Who Say Ni 21:58, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
Project Snape! Edit
I would very much like to be the part of Project GreasyGit! I can help put in a few paragraphs to making Severus Snape a more likeable man! it is a character I can relate to and hence want the permission to Edit it! Thanks & Regards,
protecting pages Edit
How do you expect this wiki to get edits when well over half the pages I've seen are semi-protected or protected. I believe that no person should be restricted to editing a small percentage of the pages of this wiki. Out of at least a hundred wikis that I have seen, none have even thought of this. So lets get down to the bottom of this: why do you protect a majority of the pages on this wiki (I am thinking you are trying to force people to register)? In a free wiki everyone can edit freely without creating an account or paying a fee. This wiki is not a free wiki. Definitely not. If you are convinced by my argument remove all the protection on any page in this wiki. Then this wiki is a free wiki where anyone, regardless of anything, can share share their knowledge AND edit freely. Jacob 22.214.171.124 23:35, February 21, 2011 (UTC)
- I'd estimate the actual number of articles with protection on them at around two dozen, maybe three tops (not counting templates). That's two or three dozen, out of almost eight-thousand pages on this wiki. Such protection is usually placed because either those pages have been repeatedly vandalized, or inexperienced users continually make unhelpful edits. For example, I've lost count of how many times Hufflepuff-related articles have had the bit about "particularly good finders" added to them, or how many times the "James Potter was Chaser/Seeker" debate has come up. In most cases, such protection is a temporary measure, but even when it's added indefinitely, registered users can still edit those pages. It takes all of about five minutes to set up an account, and there is no fee. - Nick O'Demus 11:19, February 22, 2011 (UTC)
Anonymous 02:55, April 8, 2011 (UTC)Request unprotection of Avada Kedavra Edit
I was going to add in the table of victims
|Lucius Malfoy (Chamber of Secrets film)*||Harry Potter (unsuccessfu)|
But the stupid page is protected!
- Lucius never gets far, Dobby yells, "You shall not hurt Harry Potter!" and causes Lucius to fly backwards down some stairs. He mutters, "avada" and then is attacked.
I think we should be unprotected, because we joined this wiki so that we could contribute to it, and if we can't contribute, then why did we join?
I cant create an account! Edit
Why is that?
-(Soon to be)Arenaturbo!
Voldemort page Edit
I want to add Bellatrix Lestrange as a paternal aunt in the "Family Members" list for the "Scorpius Malfoy" entry, could you unprotect it?
please unprotect this page for ginny weasley. i am a massive fan and i would really like to contribute
WHY CANT WE EDIT THAT IS STUPID IT NEEDS TO BE EDITED
Request for Unprotection (Voldemort Etymology) Edit
I would request unprotection of the etymology section of the Voldemort article, because previous authors have neglected to reflect on the secondary meaning of the French word "vol" which adds another dimension to his name. If I will not be allowed to edit it, I'd appreciate talking to someone who can edit it, so they might add some information I've gathered. --ajmurphyspence
This page won't get any edits if it's all protected. Just because we are 'new users' it doesn't mean we don't have as good, if not better, ideas than the older users. So why not unprotect this site and patrol it for spam. Everything we do seems to be edited by one of you snooty 'older users.' No offence, but your like Percy waving his Prefect badge around to show who's in charge. But you haven't made an improvement.
- Articles that are protected are done so for a reason, usually if they are the target of edit wars or vandalism. Only a few articles are fully protected. Those articles that are semi-protected will be editable by new users four days are registering their account once their account becomes auto-confirmed. Also, please sign all edits on talk pages and forums with four tildes like so: ~~~~ - Cavalier One(Wizarding Wireless Network) 11:54, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
I request that the Ginevra Weasley page either be Fixed, white page, Black text, normal blue links, or unprotect it so someone, whos probably annoyed at it also, could fix it. Thats my only real complaint or request.
It is a free wiki and there are lots of details that people miss. You need to understand that you aren't perfect, you can't be great all the time, so I heartedly request that you make this topic undisabled for editing.
126.96.36.199 22:58, December 19, 2011 (UTC) Harrypotterawesomepickle99
I request to be unprotected for reasons like changing information to be more acurate..
Obsessed by draco 10:19, December 20, 2011 (UTC)
Please open this page to editingEdit
- What page? You didn't specify one. ProfessorTofty 23:42, February 21, 2012 (UTC)
- James Potter the second.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs).
- While I don't have the authority to protect or unprotect pages, I will say that asking to have a page unprotected when you have recently inserted incorrect information onto a page several times, clearly ignoring a warning on your talk page regarding this, is probably a futile action. -- 1337star (Owl Post) 00:09, February 22, 2012 (UTC)
On the James Potter (Harry's father's) page it says that he was a Gryffindor chaser, but he was a seeker. Being a new member I can't change it. How long will it be before I can?
184.108.40.206 23:27, March 10, 2012 (UTC)
- Well, considering you're an anon IP and don't actually have an account (at least not currently), you can't. If you do decide to make an account, according to a comment further up the page, it's 4 days after account creation, but that might have changed since then. In any case, James being a Chaser is correct (as little sense as it makes), Rowling says so here. -- 1337star (Owl Post) 23:34, March 10, 2012 (UTC)
Please either unprotect Nagini's page or correct the following point:
Some people criticise Rowling for the fact that Harry's wounds from Nagini in Deathly Hallows are cured merely with Dittany, whereas Arthur Weasley was hospitalized in St Mungos for so long. However, Harry explicitly states that the snake "only wanted to keep him there", as Voldemort himself needed to kill him. Therefore Nagini has a degree of control over use of the venom, and the point made in the Wiki article is incorrect.
The article states that it is never explained why he is cured only by Dittany, when actually it is explained three sentences later or something, and it's bugging me.