I've protected this article for one week. It seems to be a target of vandals quite often, and the last good IP edit to this page was 6 September 2010 (Almost two months ago) and that edit was to revert vandalism of a new account. I think protection is best in this case. Other people may disagree, and if people agree it shouldn't be protected, I'm fine with un-protecting. Any IPs or non-autoconfirmed accounts that wish to make good pages can request them here, on the talk page.--Gordonrox24 | Talk20:40, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with protection and personally think it should be even longer. If you watch his show or go to the website, they show vandalism of this page often, and it only encourages more. And the ip that reverted the edit is used by an active Wikipedia. wiooiw (talk) 20:50, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Should this article be protected for longer periods of time? It has had multiple protections in the past, and very little (or no) edits by IPs or new users that were not vandalism or test edits. Would it be worth our while to protect this for 6 months? --Gordonrox24 | Talk01:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]