Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2012/Option 1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by CharlieEchoTango (talk) to last version by Drboisclair |
→Position #1: sign |
||
Line 173:
# Absolutely, unequivically no. It is hard enough to find and keep editors without removing one of the few things (the satisfaction of editing and gratification of immediate publication) that works in that regard. A phrase about cracking walnuts with tanks springs to mind... [[User:Meetthefeebles|Meetthefeebles]] ([[User talk:Meetthefeebles|talk]]) 13:12, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
# '''Endorse''' Keep it as it is. The negative effect of a structural hierarchy of reviewers destroys the ethos of the project. It becomes edited by a few instead of edited by all.[[User:Davdevalle|Davdevalle]] ([[User talk:Davdevalle|talk]]) 14:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
# '''Endorse''' Pending changes is ideologically wrong for Wikipedia. It means that the vast majority of editors will be restricted from editting sensitive articles (e.g., BLP). Wikipedia has become the lead online encyclopedia because of its open structure. Unless we've decided that it's time for Wikipedia to stop growing, and instead enter a maintenance phase, PC must be rejected.
# The pending changes system may look OK in theory, but the trial period convinced me that we are better off without it. --[[User:Zundark|Zundark]] ([[User talk:Zundark|talk]]) 21:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
# I am sympathetic to the problem of a dwindling cadre of editors struggling to conserve a growing repository of information, but I think PC will hinder rather than help, for several reasons: 1) Whatever arguments can be made that PC does not violate [[WP:Anyone can edit]], it will be ''seen'' as violating it and thereby will hurt WP's image; 2) I don't see a problem with the current regime of semi-protection for articles under attack, with discipline applied to problem users and sockpuppeteers; 3) While there may currently be a backlog of bad-faith edits that have not been dealt with, PC will not make that go away but instead will create a ''second'' backlog of ''good-faith'' edits that are not visible because reviewers have not gotten around to looking at them. I see this as potentially disastrous, not least for the prospect of developing new editors. --[[User:BlueMoonlet|BlueMoonlet]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonlet|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/BlueMoonlet|c]]) 01:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
| |||