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

Content deleted Content added
Youreallycan (talk | contribs)
Timetime: Pending protection is a clear benefit to developing that primary trust
Line 530:
::[[User:Slakr|slakr]], I totally agree. A lot of problems would be eliminated by locking up articles, and only letting a select number of trusted people edit. But, then this wouldn't be Wikipedia with approximately 3,000,000 English-language articles, but instead ''Encyclopedia Brittanica'' with roughly 230,000 articles. Furthermore, while some Wikipedia articles have bias or mistakes, it's no worse than any other encyclopedia, and Wikipedia has a easy method of fixing those problems. [[User:NJ Wine|NJ Wine]] ([[User talk:NJ Wine|talk]]) 21:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
* - @[[User:Slakr]] - The goal of Wikipedia isn't to be "trusted." It never has been" - We can disagree there all day long - reader trust is a primary objective and Pending protection is a clear benefit to developing that primary trust.<font color="purple">[[User:Youreallycan|You]]</font><font color="orange">really</font><font color="red">[[User talk:Youreallycan|can]]</font>
:*If reader trust were a primary objective we wouldn't have so many editors in the first place, now would we? Seriously, a lot of our editors signed up primarily because we ''aren't'' trustworthy; we have issues with [[WP:V|inaccuracy]], [[WP:RS|poor fact-checking]], [[WP:N|relevance]], [[WP:CIVIL|elitism]], [[WP:NPOV|bias]], and [[WP:BLOCK|trigger-happiness]]. To define PC as a means of enforcing trust, in spite of the '''huge''' logistical problem it can create due to its time requirements and the fact that it solves none of those six issues (think [[the Joker]] running Arkham) is tantamount to selling us a bill of goods. —<font color="228B22">[[User:Jéské Couriano|''Jeremy'']] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|v^_^v]]</font> <sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/Jéské Couriano|Bori!]]</small></sup> 21:29, 28 May 2012 (UTC)