On 12/9/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
In the other thread I propose requiring comments for every edit, but only for users that aren't logged in. Let's test it out on them first, and see how it goes :). One tweak I just thought of now though is we'd probably be better off limiting this to only the article namespace.
(Now, how to handle a top post...do I delete the rest or keep it? ohwell)
Anthony
I don't see why we should limit that to anons there's enough newbies and regulars who fail to cite sources on a regular basis. Anyone should be encouraged (if not forced) to do so. I don't see the advantage of just doing that to anons.
Obvious spelling errors shouldn't really need a source, so there's a few crinks to iron out.
Mgm
Well, spelling fixes and other mass changes would be severely slowed down if you had to add a comment every time. I think we'd be better off testing it on "anons" (who aren't really anonymous) first. Of course, if we were going to turn it on for all users, we could exempt minor edits - and "anons" can't mark edits as minor, which is kind of what made me think to restrict it to anons first.
The comment wouldn't have to be used to cite sources. You could use it for anything, such as saying "fix spelling" or "move a paragraph". But the idea is you couldn't just leave it blank. Hopefully this would make edit patrolling easier by putting a lot more information on the recent changes page (and the watch lists).
I really can't think of much reason anyone would oppose it, especially just limited to "anon" editing of the article namespace.