"

Dear Sir:  
Wikipedia's rules for ""protecting"" a page do not make a provision for using the tool on an editor's talk page, especially when the ""protect"" is used as an added punishment.  One must wonder at the complete lack of moral fiber displayed when an administrator improperly utilizes a ""protect"" on an editor's talk page, after repeat after, said editor had been blocked from further editing.  This violation of wikipedia's rules was further compounded by the administrator's failure to withdraw the ""protection"" for nearly 24 hours after the block itself was removed.  In an attempt to cover up this ""error"" the same administrator added the comments that he was removing the block, when in fact, he was actually removing the ""protection.""  This gives rise to the notion that administrators who violate wikipedia rules are immune to sanction by their peers.  This safe harbor must give the vengeful administrator the feeling of  great power.  Sad, true, and very funny.

PS  Would you please ask administrators and editors who seek to enforce the laws of capitalization to at least spell the word correctly when they chastise 
the violator.   "