On 7/18/06, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
I would support a modification of Jimmy's "edict" to the effect that an indefinitely semi-protected article on BP would be subject to regular community processes. Indefinite semi-protection would be an expression of the belief that more harm (unsubstantiated rumors, vandalism) is likely to come from having this particular article edited by unregistered users and very new ones, than productive edits.
This makes sense. But bear in mind two important points: *It takes less time to undo harmful edits than to make them (if the page is sufficiently watched) *Wikipedia would never work.
(I mention the last point as a reminder to always react to empirical evidence, not to try and predict how a complicated system involving anonymous users would work...)
Steve