On 15/06/2010, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonav...@gmail.com> wrote: >> *Pending changes will help with disputes. >> No, and it was clearly stated in the proposal, and now clearly stated in >> the >> trial policy (scope section), that pending changes protection, level 1 or >> 2, >> should not be used on pages subject to disputes. > > I agree with your point here. The mechanism shouldn't be used > as a damper in edit wars. That way, madness lies. You could have > hundreds of reverts back and forth never going live, and a Stygian > Stable for the person sorting out through all that which revisions > and edits to go live finally. Just a total Charlie Foxtrot in other words.
Nah. It's not usually going to be anything like that bad, and worse case you can always revert the whole lot and make the editors do them again. I've done that before with articles. It's also useful because in those situations people can do 'what if I do this?' kind of edits, and people can go 'don't like that' and revert it back, or make further edits/suggestions without the concerns of messing up the users view of the article. It can act to *defuse* arguments. So I think that's over-restricting things. And that's the problem. People think they know what this feature is, and what it's for, but it's only when the community plays with it, that we'll really know. So it's a big concern that there's lots of weird and unnecessary restrictions on what is only a small test. I mean, what's the worse that can happen? > Yours, > > Jussi-Ville Heiskanen -- -Ian Woollard _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
