Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-9062114-20140924171654/@comment-3076045-20141011190923

Zippertrain85 wrote: Kruziikrel wrote: There may not be massive amounts of locked pages, but the issue is with pages being sysop locked. Who is the judge of when a page is "complete"? I believe that no article needs to be locked to the sysop level. If staff are concerned that an article is "high traffic", then why not set it at user level lock? If anything, sysop locking of a page should only be a temporary solution in the event that it is massively vandalised or prone to edit warring. In my opinion, featured articles being sysop locked is a poor excuse to have that level of "security" set upon them. I completely agree, the whole concept of so many articles on the Wiki being protected infinitely (as shown in the history) by Sysops is absurd here, as stated by Shock and Zeta also these pages are not perfect and it's not the Sysop's place to decided what is and isn't a "complete" page!

Idk how the rule featured pages are indefinitly locked came to be Did someone summon an Old-Timer? :P

No? Well... too bad ;)

The featured-article pages being locked was a policy done as a result of community consensus. If I remember correctly, It was in November or December of 2011. (Or maybe January 2012). At the time, this was done due to the sheer amount of edits that were taking place at the time - we were getting several thousand edits a day (and remember, this was a long time before we had the forums, too).

At the time, we were recieving a lot of minor vandalism of a lot of pages, but we noticed that more often than not, the same pages were having their quality reduced.

Now, having said that - Do I believe we still need this policy? Honestly? Probably not.

I think its probably a good time to re-open that discussion, and decide if still want to have Featured Article pages locked or not.