Jake Waskett (jake@waskett.org) [050208 03:28]:
Create and use a template for controversial articles, that says, in effect: "This is a highly controversial article. Before making any changes, please familiarise yourself with the discussion page, and add a comment describing your change and the justification for it." We should also link to WP:NPOV.
Such a template exists, but it's presently only applied to talk pages.
(The idea is that such messages to Wikipedia editors are only ever to be applied to an article as a temporary thing in the hope of facilitating their removal - e.g. {{protected}}, {{npov}}, even {{stub}}. Ones intended to be permanent fixtures seem not to be favoured at all by most editors.)
If it doesn't work, we can create a "3 unjustified edits rule", similar to the 3RR, and enforced in the same way. This need only be applied to articles with the controversial header. This should help to some extent, as forcing descriptions and justifications will slow editors down and may also create a deterrent for edits that authors *know* are NPOV or are unwilling to discuss the matter. This may help get rid of the more rabid POV editors.
I don't think it'll do a damned thing to slow down POV pushers, but I do think the Summary field being compulsory would be good. It actually took me a couple of days to realise what it was for (commenting in a version control system).
- d.