Editing Main Page featured article protection/re-write (section)

===For semi-protection===
# A featured article should "exemplify our very best work."<ref>See [[Wikipedia:Featured article criteria]]</ref> This is not the impression a reader gets seeing a vandalized article.
# An article that has reached featured status should need minimal further editing.
# The featured article of the day attracts far more vandals than other articles,<ref>On average a page is edited once every 23 days, and one in twenty edits is a vandal edit. (See [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Vandalism studies/Study1]]). Hence, on average an article is vandalised once every 460 days. On average the MPFA is vandalised 90 times during the day (December MPFA analysis), which is 41 400 times more than the average article.</ref> and the proportion of vandal edits is also much higher.<ref>The average percentage of vandal edits on the MPFA is 34.4% (December MPFA analysis), compared to 5% for the average article (WikiProject Vandalism Study 1).</ref> The Main Page is however widely [[Help:Watching pages|watchlisted]] and it takes an average response time of only 1 minute 25 seconds to repair each vandal edit.<ref name="December study" /> Some vandalism can also be reverted by automated [[WP:BOT|bots]].<ref>Bots are ineffective against subtle changes however, and can even revert to damaged versions: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Basiliscus&diff=135110059&oldid=135109769 Reversion] by [[User:MartinBot]] to a severely damaged version of [[Basiliscus]]: Today's featured article on [[1 June]] [[2007]]</ref> Nonetheless, with around 90 vandal edits a day, FAs are typically vandalized for over two hours during their stay on the Main Page, thus roughly one in eleven readers view a vandalized page, which is again significantly more than normal.<ref name="December study">For detailed data see [[Wikipedia talk:Don't protect Main Page featured articles/December Main Page FA analysis]] - a study on the nature of edits while on the Main Page.</ref><ref>See also [[Wikipedia talk:Main Page featured article protection#some analysis]], [[Wikipedia talk:Main Page featured article protection#December 1-7 analysis]] and [[Wikipedia talk:Main Page featured article protection#Time taken to correct vandalism]]</ref> Major damage can even go uncorrected for days.<ref>[[El Greco]]: Today's featured article on [[19 January]] [[2007]]. The [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=El_Greco&diff=101789508&oldid=101788691 deletion of the entire biography section by an IP] went uncorrected for 2.5 days ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=El_Greco&diff=102352836&oldid=102103467 correcting diff]).</ref>
# Many editors spend the whole day struggling to keep on top of vandalism. This time could be spent working on other articles.
# Having to fight vandals subjects the article's editors to harassment and degrades their work. Some feel not protecting is insulting and fails to consider the welfare of the people behind the article.
# New and anonymous users come to the talk page every few days to register their complaints and dismay that the FA is being vandalized and request protection.<ref>See, for example, these two requests: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Excel_Saga&diff=next&oldid=135794922][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Excel_Saga&diff=next&oldid=135887439] at [[Talk:Excel Saga]]: Today's featured article on [[4 June]][[2007]], and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABattle_of_Midway&diff=136579303&oldid=136578745 this request] at [[Talk:Battle of Midway]]: Today's featured article on [[7 June]] [[2007]]. Other comments made by anonymous editors on the talk page of articles featured on the Main Page in the first 10 days of June 2007 can be viewed here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AHarriet_Arbuthnot&diff=135264984&oldid=135250071][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ABattle_of_Midway&diff=136501516&oldid=135682458]</ref> When it is protected, no good faith new or anonymous users request unprotection, countering the idea that users would prefer a page they can edit to a page that isn't vandalized.<!--If you disagree with this, please provide an example of a good faith editor requesting a change on a talk page after semi-protection of the Main Page featured article-->
# Protection is applied or registration required in many other instances. Much of the logic that applies to Main Page FA protection also applies to the Main Page, which despite bearing the slogan ''anyone can edit'' at the top is always fully protected. Uploading an image to Wikipedia or [[Wikimedia Commons]] requires a login, while replacing a Main Page featured article seen by children with a disturbing image does not. In addition, certain mainspace articles are protected for very extended periods (e.g. [[George W. Bush]]).
# Unprotected articles may come out worse off for their time on the Main Page.<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simeon_I_of_Bulgaria&diff=133958043&oldid=133748289 Before and after comparison] of [[Simeon I of Bulgaria]]: Today's featured article on [[27 May]] [[2007]]. There are three errors introduced by vandals: "predecessor =<nowiki>[[Boris II of Bulgaria|Boris I]]</nowiki>", "In 817" (should be 917), and "they was resting".</ref> There is no evidence that semi-protecting the articles will prevent significant improvement.
# Semi-protecting may encourage potential editors to sign up, creating a more honest and responsible environment, as well as other benefits (see [[Wikipedia:Why create an account?]]).
# TFA is not a [[WP:SAND|sandbox]].