On 3/31/07, Sage Ross <ragesoss+wikipedia(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The questions are, what should that bar be?, and how big a portion of
the editor pool should have the ability to so certify articles?. The
easy way would be to pick some edit count and time requirement (500
edits, 3 months?); otherwise, we would have to create some kind of
"clueful editor" status aside from admin.
-Sage
Whatever clueful is supposed to mean in this context, we should remember to
doublecheck any entries someone tagged as stable if after some time someone
turns out at arbitration or otherwise lose this status.
We also need to make sure that whatever we do, this status is given to
trustworthy people and and that such a process is scaleable. This is where
the biggest problem lies. These two can bother each other. To ensure
scalability you need to give the permission to more people, but at some
point you run out of trusted editors who are experienced enough to handle
this feature.
We need to put careful consideration into this, because if someone turns out
to muck up these priviliges it takes a lot of work to undo the damage.