This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

BLPs smell like sewers. Flagged revisions have been promised for years now. 'Nuff said.

To the Wikimedia Foundation,

Note: We are asking that this MediaWiki extension be enabled on the English Wikipedia. This is not a request for implementing a new policy here, merely the ability to allow the community to do so, if it so chooses.

1. -- Scott Mac (Doc) 14:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
2. First not-author. Hipocrite ( talk) 14:48, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
3. "The encyclopedia anyone can vandalize or reduce quality on" isn't good enough for a world-class high quality reference work. FT2 ^{( Talk |  email)} 14:49, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
4. ...or Wikipedia. Privatemusings ( talk) 06:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
5. Steve Smith ( talk) 14:54, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
6. This should have been a much higher priority than liquid threads for talkpages. Ϣere SpielChequers 14:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
7. Lara ☁ 15:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
8.  CharlotteWebb  ⚑  15:36, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
9. A gentle, respectful WTF is taking so long?. ++ Lar: t/ c 15:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC) - also see these edits from March 11 2009 :) reply
10. MZMcBride ( talk) 15:39, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
11. ⬅ ❝ Redvers in a one-horse open sleigh ❞ 15:44, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
12. For what it's worth Fritzpoll ( talk) 15:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
13. Good luck. Bali ultimate ( talk) 15:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
14. ASAP Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 15:47, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
15. It will never happen, but it should, immediately. Skinny87 ( talk) 15:48, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
16. Definitely Fram ( talk) 15:49, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
17. Do it now. Willking1979 ( talk) 15:50, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
18. Secret ^account 15:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
19. Yup. Rodhull andemu 15:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
20. Support. Off2riorob ( talk) 16:04, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
21. Needs to be done before it receives a vaporware award. -- Allen3  ^talk 16:10, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
22. Yes please. Quantpole ( talk) 16:12, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
23. Long past time. Bfigura ^{( talk)} 16:36, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
24. NW ( Talk) 16:51, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
25. At the very least for BLPs, and as soon as is technically possible. -- Avi ( talk) 16:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
26. + – Juliancolton |  ^Talk 17:00, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
27. Just Do It. Jack Merridew 17:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
28. Gawd yes. -- SB_Johnny |  ^talk 17:03, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
29. Ucucha 17:08, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
30. MTC ( talk) 17:11, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
31. GTD 17:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
32. About damn time. Nev1 ( talk) 17:22, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
33. - Jarry1250  ^{Humorous? Discuss.} 17:24, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
34. Yes please. Priyanath  ^talk 17:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
35. Long overdue. Dougweller ( talk) 17:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
36. Reso lute 17:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
37. Calmer Waters 17:48, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
38. I predicted back in October that the foundation's actions would introduce more delays. Unfortunately, it appears I was correct. Mr. Z-man 17:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
39. Tothwolf ( talk) 18:09, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
40. Since this isn't getting enough attention from the foundation. I'm not sure it'll work though but worth a try. Vyvyan Basterd ( talk) 18:19, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
41. Not holding my breath... Achromatic ( talk) 18:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
42. Support in principle. Not sure what kind of hell can be raised, and I note nothing has been stated (therefore there's nothing that would likely become a bluff, as I believe has happened with prior petitions on this subject). -- NE2 19:10, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
43. Tim Vickers ( talk) 19:10, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
44. Moni3 ( talk) 19:12, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
45. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^{( talk)} 19:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
46. +1 Please at least start the trial. (I did ask on wikitech-l for an update.) - David Gerard ( talk) 19:27, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
47. Over at tech, simulation models indicate flagged revisions may completely destabilize the universe — bring 'em on, forthwith. ^^ Proofreader77 ( talk) 19:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
48. William Avery ( talk) 19:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
49. We're so worried about scaring people off, but flagged revisions might actually attract some quality editors who have been avoiding Wikipedia because of its chaotic nature. A real expert who knows how to write and isn't out to push an agenda is more valuable than 1,000 semi-literate teenagers. Zagalejo ^^^ 19:48, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
50. Jimbo Wales - my vote should not be construed as criticism of the Foundation staff in any way, but rather as very strong support for making this a top priority -- Jimbo Wales ( talk) 19:50, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
51. {ec}Unless the underlying code is defective. As I've said before: show, road.-- Tznkai ( talk) 19:51, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
52. It's time for this to come online. Hersfold ^{( t/ a/ c)} 19:52, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
53. We should at least be able to determine what effect they will have on participation, and slapping it onto all BLPs is definitely a good idea. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 19:52, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
54.  GARDEN  19:53, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
55. How can I disagree with those guys? Lord Spongefrog , (I am Czar of all Russias!) 19:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
56. Of course. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 20:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
57. What Jimbo said. Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 20:04, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
58. Everyking ( talk) 20:07, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
59. Immediately, if not sooner. SirFozzie ( talk) 20:07, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
60. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 20:08, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
61. Long past time. Guy ( Help!) 20:13, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
62. Well of course!-- White Shadows ^{you're breaking up} 20:15, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
63. -- AFBorchert ( talk) 20:16, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
64. Tango ( talk) 20:21, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
65. Please. Kevin ( talk) 20:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
66. PhilKnight ( talk) 20:24, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
67. Start with BLP-- 300,000 articles. Semi-protect all the BLPs in the meantime. You could do that tomorrow. S B H arris 20:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
68. I supported it once and still support it today, and the sooner we have better protection for BLPs, the better Wikipedia is. -- Atama 頭 20:31, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
69. alanyst ^{/ talk/} 20:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
70. Yes please. Blueboar ( talk) 20:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
71. Unbelievably past due. Let's do this now! - Alison ^❤ 20:39, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
72. Alexius Horatius 20:39, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
73. Let's get it over with. MuZemike 20:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
74. Come on, no way they can be so lazy as to not be able to press a button. Let's just do it. TURN THEM ON! Wizardman 20:47, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
75. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 21:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
76. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:04, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
77. - Atmoz ( talk) 21:17, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
78. Jamie S93 21:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
79. Not sure I demand it, but, ya... ceran thor 21:27, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
80. Yea please James ( T| C) 21:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
81. Why are we still waiting? Mjroots ( talk) 21:44, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
82. Cirt ( talk) 21:54, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
83. I believe it is time. Basket of Puppies 21:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
84. Viridae ^Talk 21:57, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
85. I was against FlaggedRevs, but now I realize the true extent of the BLP problem. Aditya Ex Machina 22:12, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
86. This is becoming the Duke Nukem Forever of Wikipedia. Acroterion _(talk) 22:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
87. Ks0stm ^{( T• C• G)} 22:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
88. I am looking forward to use Flagged protection and patrolled revisions as approved by consensus. I know that implementation and testing is ongoing and is progressing, if somewhat slowly. Of course, the interface should be finished before rolling it out here. -- Apoc2400 ( talk) 23:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
89. This should be a project which the board ensures is delivered (on time would have been good..). John Vandenberg ^{( chat)} 23:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
90. Yes, we need this. The Arbiter ^★_★^★ 23:51, 17 December 2009 (UTC) reply
91. Erzsébet Báthory_{( talk| contr.)} 00:05, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
92. -- GRuban ( talk) 00:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
93. Without entering into the rumours about what is holding up implementation of flagged revisions, it is regrettable that there has been no progress and we have further BLP problems such as Alexander Chancellor. Allowing implementation of flagged revisions should be a priority. Sam Blacketer ( talk) 00:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
94. Yes, turn the tool on. FPPR was approved for trial eight months ago, and it's high time we allowed it to be trialled here. Sceptre ^{( talk)} 00:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
95. Soon as in "SUL is coming soon"? I hope not. MER-C 02:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
96. Gently, respectfully, but very firmly demanding that this long-promised and essential feature be working by December 31, 2009, at the latest. If necessary, reassign personnel and other resources from lower-priority development projects—which is to say, all other development projects—and get this implemented now!— Finell 02:53, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
97. Yes, please. Get it in gear... On an off-topic note... "BLPs smell like sewers." That isn't anything like Smell-O-Vision is it? The Thing _{Merry Christmas} 02:56, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
98. My vote should be construed as criticism of the Foundation staff for not making this a top priority. Cool3 ( talk) 03:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
99. It is shameful that this has taken so long. Santa Claus of the Future ( talk) 03:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
100. This was our decision to make in the first place, it's been sitting around for weeks, months, years, too long. -- Coffee // have a cup // ark // 03:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
101.  IShadowed   ✰  03:57, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
102. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 04:26, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
103. andyzweb ( talk) 05:21, 18 December 2009 (UTC) Save the wikies! reply
104. иιƒкч ? 06:55, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
105. -- Closedmouth ( talk) 08:10, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
106. Many issues remain, not least the extent of its implementation. But I most certainly want it switched on so we can actually implement what does get agreed. ~ mazca ^talk 10:21, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
107. - Peripitus (Talk) 12:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
108. ≈  Chamal  ^talk ¤ 12:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
109. -- Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
110. – blurpeace  ^(talk) 15:07, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
111. - Netalarm talk 15:16, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
112. Seriously, pull Werdna off LiquidThreads for as long as it takes to get this on the road. FlaggedRevs is the most important item in the technical pipeline, and it's blocking the plug. Happy‑ melon 15:22, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
113. This 'demand' is just too lulzy not to support 9000 percent. Only software engineers will get the joke though, I suspect. Poor bastards. MickMacNee ( talk) 15:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC) And here are some diffs for posterity, to help anyone who found this comment too cryptic by half, or evidently have misunderstood the actual point of the petition. [1] [2] [3]. MickMacNee ( talk) 15:55, 18 December 2009 (UTC) And another one for posterity. [4]. MickMacNee ( talk) 14:02, 19 December 2009 (UTC) Lots of classics here [5] too. MickMacNee ( talk) 14:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC) Anyway, the nonsense continues, but its still worth noting stuff like this [6] MickMacNee ( talk) 15:52, 20 December 2009 (UTC) And more [7] [8]. MickMacNee ( talk) 14:22, 23 December 2009 (UTC) reply
114. Demand? .. hmmmm ... meh - why not, count me in for support of Mick's 9000 percent. — Ched :  ?  15:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
115. I don't like making demands, but I agree, this has been taking too long (partly because brion left, but we should have had the developers force in place for this before that). So as an editor, I sign this. It does not reflect on our developers. — TheDJ ( talk • contribs) 16:13, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
116. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:00, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
117. Rlendog ( talk) 19:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
118. This needs to be a top priority. FloNight ♥♥♥♥ 19:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
119. shoy ( reactions) 19:57, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
120. Agreed -- Matthew Glennon ( ^T/ _C\ ^D) 20:01, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
121. If this is the roll out of the trial, then yes, let's run it up the flagpole and see how it flies. – xeno ^talk 22:27, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
122. upstate NYer 22:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
123. With reservation against the word "demand" as I know the Wikimedia Foundation does a great job, I do believe it's time. -- Shirik ( talk) 23:06, 18 December 2009 (UTC) reply
124. Sure, and I share Shirik's opinion about the word "demand". Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
125. GreenGourd ( talk) 01:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
126. Hell. Yes. Glacier Wolf 02:15, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
127. XinJeisan ( talk) 02:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
128. Krinkle ( talk) 02:35, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
129. We need to use them on BLPs. Ladyof Shalott 03:19, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
130. December21st2012Freak ^{Happy Holidays!} 03:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
131. —  Coren  ^(talk) 03:35, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
132. Jclemens ( talk) 04:18, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
133. We've been waiting far too long for this. — The  Earwig  @ 05:01, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
134. Please, before we all die of old age - Chaosdruid ( talk) 05:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
135. Iain99 ^{Balderdash and piffle} 09:11, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
136. Tiptoety ^talk 09:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
137. Rd232 ^talk 11:45, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
138. YES!!! I am 100% in favour of this. Me and my wife were talking about flagged revisions with our friends Artie and the microphone. Now normally me and Artie fight like two starving pugs in a glass box but on this, there was complete agreement all around the dinner table - the issue with BLPs is far TOO IMPORTANT for there not to be a better way to protect their safety!! Yes! And that is also a yes from my wife and from Artie and from the microphone. Hope you guys are all good - keep fighting the good fight! Your old pal, Hands of gorse, heart of steel ( talk) 14:06, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
139. Yes. The sooner the better. Robofish ( talk) 15:38, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
140. It seems unreasonable for Wikipedia to want support from the community (via donations and of course countless hours of volunteer work) while holding back important features the community needs. I believe the phrase "biting the hand that feeds you" is rather applicable here. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
141. Amalthea 20:14, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
142. @ harej 21:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
143. Guess I should sign since I'm such a proponent... ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ ( talk) 23:09, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
144. per Jimbo. Eluchil404 ( talk) 23:29, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
145. -- PhantomSteve/ talk| contribs\ 23:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC) reply
146. -- Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 00:18, 20 December 2009 (UTC) reply
147. Yes, we need it available to be properly tested. I have some doubts whether it will be workable or prove to be confusing, but there is no way to tell without trying it on a subset of BLPs, and then seeing if it can be moved to all BLPs. We should not assume it will be on balance effective here, but we do need to find out.—Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG ( talk • contribs)
148. It would be great to find FPPR in my holiday stocking. Dori ❦ ( Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 04:25, 20 December 2009 (UTC) reply
149. I'm going to echo WereSpielChequers above and say that LiquidThreads can go take a hike, we need this much more. The Wordsmith ^Communicate 04:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC) reply
150. It is important for the Wikipedia community to be able to test this extension and develop a policy around its use in order for the encyclopedia to continue to evolve. — æk ^Talk 05:46, 20 December 2009 (UTC) reply
151. Indeed. This is long overdue. Tvoz/ talk 06:57, 20 December 2009 (UTC) reply
152. Insert witty statement here. •  Ling.Nut 09:17, 20 December 2009 (UTC) reply
153. How could I miss an opportunity to tell sysadmins to be quicker? :) vvv ^t 15:59, 20 December 2009 (UTC) reply
154. It's working well on the German Wikipedia, and should be no less successful here. WP:BLP concerns are of paramount importance, and necessitate the implementation of effective measures to stop defamation before it is viewed by the general public. For articles of any type, both our perceived and actual reliability would be improved through the reduction of random graffiti and deliberately incorrect information. Alison22 ( talk) 23:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC) reply
155. This needed to be done, roughly, yesteryear, if not sooner. Nifboy ( talk) 04:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
156. I have to agree with everyone else. I also wonder why I didn't even notice this until now! Schfifty 3 06:05, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
157. Keegan ( talk) 07:52, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
158. Şļџğģő 07:56, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
159. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:49, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
160. snigbrook ( talk) 13:53, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
161. Yes please. - Mailer Diablo 16:04, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
162. Just found this. Collect ( talk) 16:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
163.   Roger Davies ^talk 19:05, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
164. Kaldari ( talk) 19:14, 21 December 2009 (UTC) reply
165. It is the consensus of the community as seen in this poll to implement it in order to test it out for two months. Valley2 city^‽ 00:58, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
166. Soap ^Talk/ _{Contributions} 03:03, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
167. MurfleMan ( talk) 03:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
168. Remember ( talk) 14:15, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
169. SheepNotGoats ( Talk) 14:52, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
170. With a heavy sigh and the hope that none are turned away,  fetch comms ☛ 22:48, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
171. J. Spencer ( talk) 03:49, 23 December 2009 (UTC) reply
172. I think they're very possibly a beneficial addition, and the code's already written. Let's flip the switch, at least on a trial basis. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:31, 23 December 2009 (UTC) reply
173. I absolutely support this, especially for BLPs. Zaereth ( talk) 21:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC) reply
174. Make is so. mav (please help review urgent FAC and FARs) 23:07, 23 December 2009 (UTC) reply
175. We've had this on Wikinews for some time. It works a dream over there. Simple and easy to use, with huge benefits. Follow us and get FlaggedRevs! Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 23:10, 23 December 2009 (UTC) reply
176. Firsfron of Ronchester 01:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC) reply
177. Sk8er5000 ( talk) 08:50, 24 December 2009 (UTC) reply
178. Let's try it out. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) ( contribs) 19:21, 24 December 2009 (UTC) reply
179. It's time already. -- Pharos ( talk) 19:39, 24 December 2009 (UTC) reply
180.   «l| Promethean ™|l»  (talk) 22:34, 24 December 2009 (UTC) reply
181. This mustn't end up in a state of indefinite renewed delays. Spellcast ( talk) 01:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC) reply
182. Long overdue. Camaron · Christopher · talk 13:07, 25 December 2009 (UTC) reply
183. Artichoker ^talk 21:29, 25 December 2009 (UTC) reply
184. RP459 ( talk) 20:59, 27 December 2009 (UTC) reply
185. Wily D 02:28, 28 December 2009 (UTC) reply
186. Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 07:01, 28 December 2009 (UTC) reply
187. Chutznik ( talk) 21:01, 28 December 2009 (UTC) reply
188. A333 ( talk) 01:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
189. Omarcheeseboro ( talk) 01:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
190. Look at the odd bedfellows this has brought together! I don't like "demands," but ... I do want to support the rapid rollout of Flagged Revisions, which could lead to quite a few other improvements. -- Abd ( talk) 02:23, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
191. I've seen it work on German Wikipedia. It's great. -- JN 466 02:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
192. Maybe a bit more of the donations should be spent on developers, give em what they want! Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 02:32, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
193. Long overdue. Johnfos ( talk) 02:36, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
194. Flagged revisions are going to significantly increase the respectability of Wikipedia in the wider world. J Milburn ( talk) 02:50, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
195. Woody ( talk) 03:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
196. Please, for a more reliable Wikipedia. Xenon54 / talk / 03:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
197. Please stop jerking us around, we don't deserve it. - Dank ( push to talk) 03:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
198. Flagged revisions are needed on BLP articles for safety and on other controversial artilces (for example ones related to evolution) for accuracy. Rusty Cashman ( talk) 04:13, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
199. I pushed to get Flagged Revisions at the Hebrew Wikisource, and it has been a very positive experience using the function. It makes it easier to combat vandalism. But it also makes it easier for new and inexperienced people to contribute, or for one-time visitors to make minor improvements, because now those edits are less threatening, since they do not appear in the default version until validated. Also, we owe it to our readers to give them texts with zero threat of vandalism. Using Flagged Revisions we can do this while at the same time keeping wiki collaboration. Dovi ( talk) 04:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
200. Xp54321 ^{( Hello! • Contributions)} 04:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
201. Given the magnitude of the BLP problem, it's overdue.-- agr ( talk) 04:55, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
202. Sarah 05:24, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
203. seav ( talk) 05:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
204. + An gr 07:14, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
205. Triwbe ( talk) 08:55, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
206. Avenue ( talk) 10:21, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
207. It's been discussed time and again, and now is the time to implement. Colds7ream ( talk) 10:49, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
208.   Cargoking   talk  11:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
209. tetraedycal, tetraedycal 11:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
210. Lankiveil ^{( speak to me)} 12:18, 30 December 2009 (UTC). reply
211. Is needed for BLPs to improve reliability. -- Footyfanatic3000 ^{( talk  · contribs)} 13:55, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
212. - Richard Cavell ( talk) 14:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
213. Omigosh yes. KV5 ( Talk • Phils) 16:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
214. Chhe ( talk) 16:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
215. Twri ( talk) 16:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
216. Barret ( talk) 19:43, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
217. "If you don´t ask, you don´t get." ~~ Phoe _talk ~~ 19:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
218. Waldir ^talk 20:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
219. If we're going to do it at all, let's get it over with already.-- Aervanath ( talk) 21:28, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
220. — Sebastian 22:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply
221. -- Ziko ( talk) 00:18, 31 December 2009 (UTC) reply
222. Why wait? Do it now for goodness sake. ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 02:04, 31 December 2009 (UTC) reply
223. And I volunteer to help review the revisions log to keep the backlog short. Cla68 ( talk) 02:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC) reply
224. Zvika ( talk) 07:31, 31 December 2009 (UTC) reply
225. I support this, since I think all vandalism and unconstructive edits should get noticed. — innotata ( Talk • Contribs) 17:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC) reply
226. We have debated this for so long, why not just be bold and implement it. It can always be turned off later if it causes problems. - AndrewBuck ( talk) 09:09, 2 January 2010 (UTC) reply
227. Ottre 12:35, 2 January 2010 (UTC) reply
228. APK whisper in my ear 16:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC) reply
229. Someguy1221 ( talk) 21:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC) reply
230. Oh hell, why not join the crowd. But I only support FlaggedRevs for BLPs! -- œ ^™ 10:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC) reply
231. Leuko ^Talk/ _Contribs 14:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC) reply
232. For BLPs. Novickas ( talk) 16:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC) reply
233. We've had the community consensus for a flagged protection version of flagged revs for quiet some time now, lets get this show on the road ;) Best, 71.243.179.232 ( talk) 22:01, 3 January 2010 (UTC) reply
234. This is the best for the project! -- MW talk contribs 23:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC) reply
235. Do it now, please. AGK 11:30, 5 January 2010 (UTC) reply
236. The technical Problems should really be resolvable, since flagged revisions are enabled on the german wikipedia since over a year. -- Frakturfreund ( talk) 15:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC) reply
237. -- AnmaFinotera ( talk · contribs) 21:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC) reply
238. Implement The Grim Reaper 14:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC) reply
239. So very long overdue. I realize that most vandalism is quickly reverted, but it is horrible that someone can go to a page soon after erroneous facts is introduced and then actually believe that fact since they trust Wikipedia. -- KelleyCook ( talk) 23:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC) reply
240. Ysangkok ( talk) 15:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC) reply
241. It's about time we gave it a go... -- Marek. 69 ^talk 01:09, 11 January 2010 (UTC) reply
242. kollision ( talk) 12:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC) reply
243. To promulgate throughout the world malicious accusations is without a doubt an abomination. Werner Heisenberg ( talk) 03:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC) reply
244. As an OTRS volunteer, I can testify that this would substantially improve things. Stifle ( talk) 09:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC) reply
245. Support, as long as this petition isn't taken as consensus to roll out new policy right away. I think once we have the technical capability, one big final discussion should go ahead, then we take action. -- Taelus ( talk) 13:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC) reply
246. Seriously, what are you people doing? How is it possible that this hasn't been done yet? Wine Guy Talk 12:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC) reply
247. -- Clarince63 ( talk) 21:42, 19 January 2010 (UTC) reply
248. Airplaneman ^talk 07:08, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
249. Yes please. NJA (t/ c) 17:30, 21 January 2010 (UTC) reply
250. German WP and WikiNews are both running FlaggedRevisions, and I haven't noticed the Four Horsemen, lambs and lions living together, or the sun rising in the west. I think we should at least give FR a chance--even if it's just to lessen the incentive for things like the BLP-deletion-o-rama of the past 2 days. (Though I don't like that word "demand".) GJC 08:24, 23 January 2010 (UTC) reply
251. Please and thank you. Tim1357 ( talk) 06:38, 24 January 2010 (UTC) reply
252. We need this ASAP!! Buckshot06 (talk) 07:25, 27 January 2010 (UTC) reply
253. Meant to sign this quite awhile ago. Not sure how we actually will want to use this, but we need the capability to test it and determine how it can best help us (primarily with the BLP problem). -- Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 20:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC) reply
254. Ham tech person 00:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC) Read the Flagged Revisions page, agree with the BLP only restriction, and think this: "A gentle, respectful WTF is taking so long?. ++ Lar" sums it up well. reply
255. What was the point in creating it, if it isn't at least going to receive a trial run? If it's not trialled, how can anyone know if it will work, or how best if can be used? TheGrappler ( talk) 17:10, 29 January 2010 (UTC) reply
256. Beloved Freak 17:18, 30 January 2010 (UTC) reply
257. Venustas 12 ( talk) 20:10, 30 January 2010 (UTC) reply
258. Definitely needed for BLPs. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk) 21:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC) reply
259. Taku ( talk) 23:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC) reply
260. Just do it. Avenue ( talk) 09:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC) reply
261. Anna Lincoln 11:42, 18 February 2010 (UTC) reply
262. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:24, 11 April 2010 (UTC) reply
263. I've been on both WikiNews and WikiBooks. For some people, here's analogy in terms of prone to vandalisim: Wikipedia is to Wikibooks as a bed of spikes is to a LaZ-Boy. Get my point? Buggie111 ( talk) 23:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC) reply
264. Come on... WikiTome ^Talk 12:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC) reply
265.  -- Lear's Fool ( talk | contribs) 07:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC) reply
266. iNkubusse ^? 09:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC) reply
267. It would generally improve and help things greatly. Sir Richardson ( talk) 14:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC) reply
268. There's no reason that the community shouldn't be able to implement the extension if it reaches consensus to do so. — Animum ( talk) 05:26, 8 July 2010 (UTC) reply
269. The community says YES! Fridae'§ Doom | Talk to me 03:15, 11 July 2010 (UTC) reply
270. Please. Throwaway85 ( talk) 03:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC) reply
271. Rlendog ( talk) 03:40, 23 August 2010 (UTC) reply
272. Definitely! Laurinavicius ( talk) 16:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC) reply
273. Allmightyduck   What did I do wrong? 01:29, 30 August 2010 (UTC) reply
274. So overdue it's not even funny Bped1985 ( talk) 05:35, 11 January 2011 (UTC) reply
275. This is really needed. _please Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk | _Sign 18:41, 20 January 2011 (UTC) reply
276. -- T H F S W ( T · C · E) 03:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC) reply
277. I could swear I signed this before, but I guess not. No time like now to see this change happen! Tiggerjay ( talk) 01:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC) reply
278. I support the implementation of this extension. Rubywine ( talk) 12:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC) reply
279. Lothar von Richthofen ( talk) 18:54, 1 June 2011 (UTC) reply
280. Sounds like a good idea to me. Wekn reven i susej eht ^{Talk• Follow} 09:12, 7 June 2011 (UTC) reply
281. Jumping on the bandwagon. Tomwsulcer ( talk) 16:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC) reply
282. Not that this poll will do anything, but the more the merrier. Silver seren ^C 07:06, 22 August 2011 (UTC) reply
283. Quote: "The encyclopedia anyone can vandalize or reduce quality on" FT2 -- Chris.urs-o ( talk) 13:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC) reply
284. I support the implementation of this extension. Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 15:31, 15 October 2011 (UTC) reply
285. I support this on all BLP edits by nonautoconfirmed users. Ramaksoud2000 ^{( Did I make a mistake?)} 22:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC) reply
286. Support. As this petition for "immediate action" is now more than two years old, it's getting pretty funny. What a comment on WP inertia! S B H arris 01:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC) reply
287. BLP are no longer a problem? I think not. Josh Parris 02:56, 28 January 2012 (UTC) reply
288. I support this! Ian159 ( talk) 14:10, 3 July 2012 (UTC) reply
289. I support this 100%! User:Jay Starz 22:08, 13 July 2012 (UTC) reply
290. No reason not to have this.— Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 03:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC) reply
291. At least implement on a trial basis. Loooong overdue!-- JayJasper ( talk) 05:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC) reply
292. I very much support the implementation of flagged revisions for BLPs on the English Wikipedia. N2e ( talk) 14:08, 17 November 2013 (UTC) reply
293. Dear lord, it's been 14 yrs? CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/ _{STUFF DONE} 17:33, 14 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Thoughts, feedback and comments on the talk page please

Please discuss on the talk page - think of this petition as a wiki version of a clipboard with room for a signature and maybe a small comment - the talk page is where you can chat to the folk holding the clipboard, and anyone else milling around.

• Wikipedia:Targeted flagging
• Wikipedia:Flagged protection and patrolled revisions petition
• Wikipedia:Petition Opposing Flagged Revisions
• User talk:Jimbo Wales/poll