[WikiEN-l] Flagged Protection Revert Etiquette (Re: Renaming "Flagged Protections")

[Carcharoth]

On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 7:47 AM, Rob Lanphier <robla at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Carcharoth <carcharothwp at googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>> By the way, I'm assuming that some edits will be of the sort "I would
>> normally remove the material and start a talk page discussion". In
>> that case, is the right thing to do to approve the edit and then
>> remove the material and start a talk page discussion, and presumably
>> as a reviewer, your edit removing the material won't be caught up in
>> flagged revisions itself?
>
> Starting a separate thread since this is off of the naming topic.
>
> I don't think it's necessary to accept the edit, since the unaccepted
> version is never really marked as "rejected" in the edit history per se, but
> rather, just never gets promoted.  The edit will still exist in the edit
> history, so it's not lost forever.
>
> The right thing to do is to do the exact same thing you would do with an
> unprotected page.  If it's not obviously vandalism, you can use the undo
> function with a polite note in the edit comment to discuss the change on the
> talk page.  Presumably, you're doing this as an autoconfirmed user, which
> means that your edits will be automatically accepted.

Can you reject with a "let's discuss on the talk page"? What I am
thinking is that some people use edit summaries to alert other editors
to a talk page discussion, and if this is not possible with the
FlaggedRevs system, I would be inclined to accept an edit and then
revert it and suggest a talk page discussion.

What I'm asking is whether you need to accept first or not. I get the
impression from what you are saying that you can click undo
straightaway and that automatically accepts the edit and undoes it in
one step (I would replace the automatic undo summary). Normally, when
reverting and adding a custom edit summary, I load the previous page
version and save that with an edit summary. But I don't think that
will work here, though maybe it will.

I suspect that any action by an autoconfirmed user will automatically
accept something of any actions not yet reviewed. Will those
autoconfirmed users get a warning that they might unwittingly be
accepting edits they might not have reviewed?

Carcharoth