User:FieldMarine/1

Semi-protect against IP & new editors. This article has been subject to frequent vandalism revolving around a CWO, presumably one who served in the unit. IMHO, based on the nature of these comments, this is a series of silly comments based on some sort of vendetta against the CWO. The total incidents of vandalism since this article was created is 55 & are broken down as follows: October 2007-February 2008 (46) May-June 2008 (5) Oct – Present (4) The article has also has been semi-protected twice: October 27 & November 25, 2007. The vandal uses several IP addresses & has been warned about this many times. This activity continues to be disruptive & I recommend permanently protecting this article from IP & new users edits to curb this activity. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 14:51, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting oppose.svg Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Also, in the future you'll want to add these requests in the correct section (at the top of the page). Rjd0060 (talk) 15:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

How many incidents of vandalism is considered enough before action is taken? FieldMarine (talk) 15:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Quite a few. If you look at the history of the article, there have been no edits (aside from yours) in over a month.  This page explains the protection policy in more detail. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

That's because no one caught the vandalism done in November 2008, until I reverted it recently. 55 incidents of vandalism since October 2007. Is that considered excessive? FieldMarine (talk) 16:27, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

How much vandalism is considered excessive, beacuse the article Protection policy does not say? Also, this persistant vandalism includes subtle defamation of a person by making silly comments about a CWO in the unit. FieldMarine (talk) 16:41, 1 January 2010 (UTC)