In my view, the move feature will be sufficiently safe for general release if the effects are easily _reversible_ - just being non-destructive isn't enough. That is, if a newbie or anyone else makes a mistake or moves an article to where they shouldn't, it should be possible for anyone to reverse the change, just as it is possible to revert an article to a previous version. At the moment, only sysops can revers a move, because of the need to delete a page. I think this needs to change before the move function goes on general release. I would suggest making possible to move a page without creating a redirect at the old page title by checking a tickbox. Then, even if a redirect was getting in the way of moving an article back to where it once was, a user could then get around this by moving the redirect to a new title to make way for the article. LDC wrote: I wholeheartedly agree with this - there will always be a need for trusted people to oversee the system. While a democratic system of 'old hands' sounds appealing, I think preading out the really drastic powers - like IP blocking - to more users could have the reverse effect to that intended. The more people who have access to IP blocking (for example, by a 'vote to block this person' system), the more likely it is to be abused and used in arguments over controversial content rather than cases of genuine vandalism. A group of 'old hands' abusing the system, perhaps because of their strong views on a topic, would be very hard to deal with unless there were sysop-type users overseeing things. Tim (the Enchanter) _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx