New Wikipedia Edit Policy Now everyone cannt change

[phpphp 0]

Wikipedia nonprofit foundation has edited its policy about editing article on wikipedia. Now everyone like old times will be able to edit but these edits will not publish until an expert will review it. This policy will be implement with the cooperation of experienced volunteers. I am doubtful about this policy. Its all done by volunteers but who know about these volunteers? If we are not satisfied with his decision then what? its complecated. what you say?

[andresf91 0]

Where did you find that info?Is that a new policy for editing ALL articles? Or just the protected ones, which have existed in Wikipedia for years???

[TheDisturbedOne 1]

I, too, would like to see a source on this. Additionally, I edit wikipedia a bit (1,500 edits) and haven't been informed of such changes. If they are anything like what you said, I don't agree with them.

[mahesh2k 0]

I never heard of this news. From where you read this ? Any news site ? or wikipedia's official announcement ? If so, please link to that respective article. This way it'll be easy to confirm the news. Which looks suspicious cause if this is declared by wikipedia. It would have hit most of the news sites online. Which i doubt is released, so i'm asking for links. If the news as you say is true. Then standard of wikipedia will be improved. Currently it is edited by almost anyone and it's standard and credibility is under question. People don't take wikipedia for granted when they make research and analysis reports. Also Wikipedia's references are somewhat questionable. Some referal sites and commercial articles are also under question. If wikipedia does apply such policy then surely it's standard will improve.

[TheDisturbedOne 1]

Most of the references on articles are checked, unless the article isn't heavily edited. Any Good Article or Featured article has to go through a rigorous inspection of the sources before it is promoted. I happen to currently be in a debate about sources on wikipedia on the Boston article, because it has a biased opinion. That's one of the main reasons why a website isn't allowed as a reliable resource.

[The Simpleton 2]

I remember reading something about this in the papers but don't remember if it is exactly this or something else. I haven't tried editing in Wikipedia so far and don't plan to in the near future, but have always been skeptical about the articles and the people who write them. I know that most of them are true and accurate, but still the fact that anyone can edit the article makes it kind of creepy. If this new policy is really true then it will indeed be a relief but won't it also be time-taking?