Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2012/Option 1: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Line 18:
#As a purist, I think Wikipedia should remain instantly updateable, without allowing privileged users to "approve" content. As a radical, I think we should just remove all currently unsourced content and revert any new additions of unsourced content, to prevent any sort of "sneaky vandalism" or other unhelpful edits whatsoever. That would be a ore useful solution than pending changes, I think. Really, I think we should have a Wikipedia where anyone can write crap, and a second Wikipedia, which can claim to be reliable. Of course, Citizendium tried that and essentially failed. But I digress. Pending changes compromises my ideal of openness, and is inadequate in stopping vandalism or undesirable edits. <span style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:80%;">'''/[[User:Fetchcomms|<span style="color:#000;">ƒETCH</span>]][[User talk:Fetchcomms|<span style="color:#000;">COMMS</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Fetchcomms|<span style="color:#000;">/</span>]]'''</span> 17:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
#This tool is fundamentally in violation of the idea of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. I am not convinced that our coverage is so great or our problems so immense that we need to change this foundational policy and make it more difficult for new users to edit. [[User:ElKevbo|ElKevbo]] ([[User talk:ElKevbo|talk]]) 23:18, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
#Absolutely not. I quietly watched the first trial from afar and saw no saving virtues in it whatsoever. Moreover, we'll no longer be able to call ourselves the "encyclopedia that anyone can edit". Lock Pending changes up and throw away the key. [[User:Evanh2008|Evanh2008]] ([[User talk:Evanh2008|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Evanh2008|contribs]]) 23:49, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
<!-- PLEASE ADD A HASH SIGN (#) BEFORE YOUR ENDORSEMENT. USE THE DISCUSSION SECTION TO REPLY TO COMMENTS IN OTHER USERS' ENDORSEMENTS. PLEASE DO NOT ADD ALTERNATE PROPOSALS -->