It's not as strict as that. I see nothing wrong with: 1. Telling the list you protected the article (and why). 2. Making ONE LAST EFFORT toward neutral POV. 3. Then butting out until a consensus emerges. I would only worry, Erik, if someone made a practice of getting the last word by repeatedly doing the above. In this case, another sysop selected another version to revert it to, so no harm was done. Ed Poor ---- "Don't cry till you're hurt". --Robert Heinlein, ''The Man Who Traveled in Elephants''