::From an admin POV the amount of "process" to protect it isn't problematic. From an editor POV it is highly problematic for anyone who wants to edit.  Maybe it would confuse (or even satisfy) the bot if it was moved to Schnorrer (Yiddish term) and Schnorrer was a dab.  (and protected with a talk page explanation if the bot still comes back). Though not quite a valid reason to dab, a protected dab page is less a hindrance to getting edits on the real articles. I'll do the work if you unprotect it.   

 I don't like the idea of doing that disambiguation just to deal with a silly bot.  Any editor can edit the article when it's unprotected, or propose a change on the talk page when it's protected.