Tony Sidaway wrote
I dispute any suggestion that protection of a page is in any way *less* drastic than blocking a user. If a page is protected, *nobody* can edit it. If one or two over-enthusiastic revert warriors are blocked for up to a day, only their potential edits are lost--and since they're likely to be holding up editing by their reverts, their loss is often a very good thing.
That omits the edits to other pages blocked users cannot make.
Page protection is unpopular; temp-banning 3RR violaters seems to have a good consensus behind it. This displays a rational attitude to the content of the page in question, I think. Edit warring usually stops the development of a page right in its tracks, often for the sake of a part of the whole that is not that significant.
Charles