Wikipedia:PC2012/RfC 1

There are several valid points raised by both sides in this discussion. Supporters of Level 2 Pending Changes argue based on two main points. One, it would open certain pages prone to problematic edits (such as highly-visible templates or little-watched articles about living people) to editing with a much lower risk of said edits being visible. Such pages are currently fully protected or semiprotected, and require users without the necessary access levels to make edit requests, and supporters contend that this would make these sorts of articles more open. Secondly, it would help keep attacks from autoconfirmed sockpuppets from becoming visible while simultaneously allowing edits from other good faith users to go through. Opponents of Level 2 Pending Changes are both against it altogether or against it as is. Those who are completely against it in any form argue that it is too complex (whether or not PC in and of itself is already too complex) and that it would create/add to stratification among editors. Some also argued that existing options (semiprotection, full protection, or PC Level 1) work fine and they couldn't see any situation where it would be preferable to other options. Finally, a few stated that it would give administrators and reviewers the ability to exert ownership articles. I do not think the final argument is compatible with our guideline on assuming good faith, and have therefore given it no weight, but the other arguments I have carefully considered. There are also some users who are not against the concept of Level 2 Pending Changes, but against it as is. Specifically, these users want to see a concrete policy laid out before it is used, as they believe it could potentially be misused if such a policy doesn't exist. Of particular note, for this and future discussions, is the nearly universal rejection of using PC Level 2 for content disputes. Given all of this, I would have to say the result is no consensus, which would default to not using PC level 2 for the time being. We will leave discussions about PC level 2 until we have used PC level 1 as a community for 3-6 months. By then, we will have a better idea of how PC works, and people can work out a policy and come up with/adjust their views in accordance with that. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:05, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The administrators who closed May's Request for Comment (RfC) on Pending Changes determined that it should be implemented around the end of 2012, but asked the community to continue working on the Pending Changes draft policy, noting that opposers had pointed out potential problems and supporters were not uniform in what they were supporting. Following extensive discussions, this is the first in a series of RfCs designed to answer these questions before some form of Pending Changes goes live. This RfC is on one of the less controversial questions – the role (if any) of Pending Changes Level Two – in the hope that the community will be able to come to a quick decision on this one, and in the process, join in developing a more elaborate RfC to follow.

Pending Changes currently has two levels of protection, Level 1 (PC/1) and Level 2 (PC/2):

• When a page with PC/1 protection is edited by an unregistered user or new user, that edit and all following edits by any user are not included in the article displayed to the general public (that is, for readers who are not logged in), until the edits are approved by someone with the "reviewer" user right.
• When a page with PC/2 protection is edited by a non-reviewer, not just unregistered and new users, that edit and all following edits by any user are not included in the article displayed to the general public, until the edits are approved by a reviewer.

Table of Pending Changes Level One and Level Two

Interaction of Wikipedia user groups and page protection levels   Unregistered or newly registered Confirmed or autoconfirmed Extended confirmed Template editor Admin Interface admin Appropriate for (See also: Wikipedia:Protection policy) No protection Normal editing The vast majority of pages. This is the default protection level. Pending changes All users can edit Edits by unregistered or new editors (and any subsequent edits by anyone) are hidden from readers who are not logged in until reviewed by a pending changes reviewer or administrator. Logged-in editors will see all edits, whether accepted or not. Infrequently edited pages with high levels of vandalism, BLP violations, edit-warring, or other disruption from unregistered and new users. Semi Cannot edit Normal editing Pages that have been persistently vandalized by anonymous and registered users. Some highly visible templates and modules. Extended confirmed Cannot edit Normal editing Normal editing* Normal editing Specific topic areas authorized by ArbCom, pages where semi-protection has failed, or high-risk templates where template protection would be too restrictive. Template Cannot edit Normal editing High-risk or very-frequently used templates and modules. Some high-risk pages outside of template space. Full Cannot edit Normal editing Pages with persistent disruption from extended confirmed accounts. Critical templates and modules. Interface Cannot edit Normal editing Scripts, stylesheets, and similar objects central to operation of the site or that are in other editors' user spaces. * In order for a template editor to be able to edit extended confirmed protected pages, they must also be extended confirmed, but in practice this is almost always the case. Other modes of protection: Create protection Move protection Upload protection Office protection Cascade protection view talk edit

Please indicate your support for or opposition to PC/2. Any replies to voters or longer rationales should go in the Discussion section. 14:13, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Also see #Vote on closure below. 11:49, 6 September 2012 (UTC)