Tim Starling wrote:
It's true that you could make minor changes to
formatting, but those
changes do not provide enough benefit to counteract the waste of time
and resources caused by vandalism.
I totally agree and I think what Angela said is valid here as well:
this type of page isn't all that suited for a wiki, so we should have
really no qualms about just protecting the page and being done with
it.
I'd say the same thing about a *lot* of things on wikisource. At some
point fairly early in the development of a source article, protection
is a wise option. Probably the protection message should make it very
clear to people that if they have a real change to make, the article
can easily be unprotected.
But it seems silly for anyone to have to pull their hair out fighting
vandalism on a page that *could not possibly* be improved anyway,
because it is already accurate.
--Jimbo