[WikiEN-l] Short-lived retreat

[Gwern Branwen]

zetawoof <zetawoof at gmail.com> writes:
> No. Protected articles and deleted articles are protected and deleted
> for a reason: for example, articles are most often protected to end
> edit wars; even admins are discouraged from editing protected articles
> in any nontrivial ways, so I see no reason that certain privileged
> editors should be allowed to ignore protection. For simple protection
> against vandalism, we already have semiprotection and blocking.
> Deleted revisions are similar: they're deleted because they shouldn't
> be visible. (Articles which are entirely deleted are a special case.
> But most admins will send you a copy of a deleted article, or undelete
> one to your userspace, if you ask nicely.)
>
> So there's no good reason I see for *editors* to be given any tools
> beyond what they've already got. If they need some help with
> maintenance work (as you put it), that's another story - but simple
> editing is already available to everyone.

But why not give semiprotection to some subset of editors? They're the ones closest to
the articles, it's not nearly so important and serious as full
protection, and it's not like there are any rules against editing a
semi-protected page. We've already given Undo, a weak form of rollbacks,
to editors, so there's precedent. Besides, it seems to me that
semi-protection is more of an editing tool than something that's clearly
an admin tool.

-- 
Gwern
Inquiring minds want to know.