Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2012/Option 3: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Courcelles (talk | contribs) |
Chevsapher (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 21:
# It seems that there are many issues with the current policy of when to use Pending Changes. It would seem in some very specific cases that it could be a helpful tool, such as with frequently vandalized pages, those of a complicated topic (advanced physics for example) or things that arent hard facts (many car pages for instance have a constant back and forth when uses change them from "Sportscars" to "Supercars" and vice versa). However I would like to see a more developed - and clearly written policy. This needs to be able to be explained to new or inexperienced users without consulting a chart with more color-coding than a rainbow or a wall of text. If its implemented in a way that seems obtuse to users it may discourage them and reduce the potential pool of contributors. [[User:Racingfreak92|Racingfreak92]] ([[User talk:Racingfreak92|talk]]) 23:30, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
# '''Endorse'''. While I see the (potential) benefits of this proposal there are, in its current form, too many open ends with some important concerns (reviewers, when to use PC) that do not seem adequately addressed. --[[User:Wolbo|Wolbo]] ([[User talk:Wolbo|talk]]) 21:00, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
# '''Endorse'''. The suggested changes to Wikipedia conflict with the entire principal of the encyclopedia. Furthermore, as these policies are they will make Wikipedia even ''more'' complicated and will create a larger gap between the general userbase and the admins. It would be nice to have a review-type process for oft-vandalized articles, however; I get very tired of reverting articles like [[The Legend of Zelda]]. [[User:Chevsapher|Chevsapher]] ([[User talk:Chevsapher|talk]]) 01:16, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]
| |||