I noticed the tag [protection](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/protection "show questions tagged 'protection'") is used for a few unrelated concepts. The main ones that stick out are:

* preventing edits on workbooks and documents
* [security](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/security "show questions tagged 'security'") stuff: [authorization](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/authorization "show questions tagged 'authorization'"), [hacking](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/hacking "show questions tagged 'hacking'"), etc

There was no tag wiki for this tag originally, and there are 420 questions at present :(

It fails all the preliminary checks before burnination:

> 
> Does it describe the contents of the questions to which it is applied? and is it unambiguous?
> 
> 
> 

**No**, the tag is ambiguous and is equally applicable to:

* branch protection (VCS)
* access control
* security measures

> 
> Is the concept described even on-topic for the site?
> 
> 
> 

Yes and no, the concept can be on or off-topic depending on the context (questions about protection can be about security, general computing, or asked in a programming context).

> 
> Does the tag add any meaningful information to the post?
> 
> 
> 

**No**, protecting something is a goal, while on-topic questions revolve around specific programming problems / algorithms that are often only circumstantially related to protection.

> 
> Does it mean the same thing in all common contexts?
> 
> 
> 

**No**, the only common meaning is that it is a process of restricting access to something which, as described above, can involve completely unrelated tasks.