* A number of issues with the trial implementation and/or the suggested Draft Policy of Pending Changes were raised by supporters of all three positions, including:
*:# The possibility of ongoing review backlogs and the lack of guidance provided in the Draft Policy for addressing them.
*:# Lack of detail as to the responsibilities of reviewers and the qualifications a user must possess to be given the “reviewer” right.
*:# Lack of detail as to when Pending Changes should be preferred to semi-or full protection, and how administrators and those who request the implementation of some form of protection/pending changes should make the decision about which to apply. In particular, it was pointed out that though Pending Changes may be particularly useful in two types of cases, the draft policy gives little consideration to the types of cases in which it may be most useful, described by one editor as: “One, where the vast majority of edits are good faith, but bad faith ones are causing exceptional damage. Two, where the vast majority of edits are bad faith, but the article nonetheless has a history of productive anon edits.” ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Pending_changes/Request_for_Comment_2012/Option_3&diff=484696473&oldid=483878453])
