Wikipedia talk:Edit Approval

Standards for non-admin users[edit]

How is someone to be marked as "trustworthy"? Chris M. 10:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"or a person who has been contributing for a certain amount of time" is not a good criteria for trustworthy people. Rather, use a criteria like "a person who have been marked as trustworthy by any two administrators" or something like that. Thue | talk 21:32, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. By the way, if anyone objects to the change I made, feel free to bring it up here before we revert it. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 22:24, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is a feature request[edit]

This is a feature request. Put it on Bugzilla instead. R adiant _>|< 13:26, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Practicability[edit]

The trouble is, this essentially means that every single edit would have to be vetted individually by someone. It might be that obvious vandalism could be spotted, but random patrollers could still not tell if specialisd facts were right or wrong. I for one would not be willing to review lists of edits searching for articles I might know something about. I watch the articles which interest me, and while it might take a while before i visit and see a mistake, this would not make it happen faster. I am likely to look over a whole bunch of edits in one go. But perhaps you need some comments from people who do regularly watch the lists of edits, to see if they think it would make their lives any easier. Sandpiper 12:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]