Wikipedia:Pending changes
This is an information page. It is not an encyclopedic article, nor one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines; rather, its purpose is to explain certain aspects of Wikipedia's norms, customs, technicalities, or practices. It may reflect differing levels of consensus and vetting. |
When a page under pending changes protection is edited by an
Pending changes are visible in the page history, where they are marked as "pending review". The latest accepted revision is displayed to the general public, while logged-in users see the latest revision of the page with all changes applied. When editors who are not reviewers make changes to an article with unreviewed pending changes, their edits are also marked as "pending review" and are not visible to most readers until they are reviewed.
Both logged-in users and unregistered users who click the "edit this page" tab edit the latest revision as usual. If there are pending changes awaiting review, there will be a dropdown box next to the article title pointing to the pending changes.
Pending changes may be used to protect articles against persistent vandalism, violations of the
Applying pending changes protection
For the policy on applying pending changes protection, see Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection. This section is intended to supplement or clarify the policy. If they disagree, please defer to the policy or discuss the option of changing it. |
Administrators may apply pending changes protection to pages that are subject to heavy and persistent
In addition, administrators may apply temporary pending changes protection on pages that are subject to significant but temporary vandalism or disruption (for example, due to media attention) when blocking individual users is not a feasible option. As with other forms of protection, the time frame of the protection should be proportional to the problem. Indefinite PC protection should only be used in cases of severe long-term disruption.
Like semi-protection, PC protection should never be used in genuine content disputes, where there is a risk of placing a particular group of editors at a disadvantage.
Editors without administrator privileges can
Reviewing pending edits
For the guideline on reviewing edits, see Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes. This section is intended to supplement or clarify the guideline. If they disagree, please defer to the guideline or discuss the option of changing it. |
The process of reviewing is intended as a quick check to ensure edits don't contain:
- vandalism
- violations of the policy on living people
- copyright violations
- other obviously inappropriate content
Reviewers are sufficiently experienced users who are granted the ability to accept other users' edits. Reviewers have a similar level of trust to
Reviewers and administrators will see a yellow watchlist banner on their watchlist whenever there is a pending edit needing review. If a reviewer or administrator wishes to disable it, they can paste #mw-fr-watchlist-pending-notice {display: none}
to their common.css.
Acceptance of an edit by a reviewer is not an endorsement of the edit. It merely indicates that the edit has been checked for obvious problems as listed above.
Reviewer rights are granted upon request at
Reviewing of pending changes should be resolved within reasonable time limits (at most a few hours). Backlog management should be coordinated at a community level. The backlog can be viewed at Special:PendingChanges. As of July 2021, edits are rarely unreviewed for more than a day or two and the backlog is frequently empty.
Pending changes adds highlighting that is lost when disabled
In the edit history, accepted revisions are highlighted, which improves readability. Additionally, visible tags are applied to indicate why particular edits were accepted ("automatically accepted"/"accepted by [Username]"). As of September 2018[update], this highlighting is still permanently lost for past changes on a given page whenever the pending changes setting is disabled.[1] When pending changes are enabled again, the highlighting will only be applied to newer changes. Therefore, it is a good choice to leave pending changes enabled when other protections are applied.[2]
Effect of various 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 newly registered 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 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 | 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 | Can edit♦ | Pages with persistent disruption from extended confirmed accounts. | ||||
Interface | Cannot edit | Normal editing | Scripts, stylesheets, and similar objects fundamental to operation of the site or that are in other editors' user spaces. | ||||
★ The table assumes a template editor also has extended confirmed privileges, which is almost always the case in practice. ♦ Administrators are only authorized to perform non-controversial edits that have received consensus in the talk page. | |||||||
Other modes of protection:
|
Frequently asked questions
- If an established user edits an article with unreviewed pending changes, is the new version automatically accepted?
- No. If the user is a reviewer (that is, the user has been granted the "reviewer" permission), they will be prompted to review and accept any unreviewed pending changes. If the user is not a reviewer, the edit will also be marked as "pending review". (Reviewers can test this by unaccepting the current version of a page under pending changes and then trying to edit.) An exception to this is when a user reverts a pending edit to the latest accepted revision: in this case the revert is automatically accepted.
- What happens if several IP edits to an article under pending changes result in a undoesit.)
- If they were all made by a single IP, the new version is automatically accepted. If different users edited, the new version is not accepted (to prevent potential abuse).
- On which kinds of pages can pending changes be used?
- At first, it was determined by consensus that pending changes could be used only on articles, subject to the protection policy, and on test pagesin project space. A later request for comment found it permissible to use pending changes beyond articles; however, it is restricted by the software to the main and project namespaces, and no request to allow other namespaces was made. It is not technically possible for talk pages to be placed on pending changes.
- Wasn't pending changes protection dropped?
- Yes and no. Pending changes protection was deployed on a trial basis in 2010. In 2011, pending changes protection was dropped as a mechanism for protecting pages, until a consensus agreement on its deployment was reached. There have been a series of discussions on using the feature and it was put back into service on December 1, 2012. Since then only pending changes level 1, affecting the edits of new and unregistered users, is being used. As of January 2017 there has been consensus to drop pending changes level 2, and as a result only level 1 is now used.
- How can you tell if a page has pending changes protection?
- Protected pages are normally marked with a small padlock symbol in the top corner depending on its level of protection. Also, there will be a drop-down box next to the article title, pointing to the pending changes, if there are any.
- How can I see the details of review?
- On a page with pending page protection, hover the mouse over the arrow in the box (for logged in users) or for logged out users. You'll see a popup with text: This is the latest accepted revision, reviewed on 15 January 2025.. The link "reviewed" leads to the log of the review.
Timeline
Below is a list of past discussions and polls relating to the Pending Changes feature:
- March 2009: original trial
- May 2010: RFC on some pre-trial issues
- June 2010 – August 2010: Pending changes trial
- August 2010: Straw poll 2 to 1 in favor of continuing PC in some form
- September 2010: Straw poll on interim usage
- September 2010 – May 2011: Continuation of pending changes without clear mandate
- February 2011 – May 2011: PC RfC 2011 Ended the original PC trial.
- March 2012 – June 2012: PC RfC 2012 established consensus to enable PC before the end of 2012.
- September 2012: WP:PC2012/RfC 1 discussed whether to use Level 2 pending changes.
- October 2012: WP:PC2012/RfC 2 discussed when to apply pending changes, the criteria for rejecting edits, and various ideas for reducing backlog.
- November 2012: WP:PC2012/RfC 3 discussed deployment and usage of the pending changes feature.
- December 2012 – : Pending changes re-enabled on a permanent basis
- May 2013: PC RfC 2013 is closed as requiring further discussion for implementation. It reopened the question of whether to use Level 2 pending changes.
- January 2014: PC RFC 2014 opened to determine if there is consensus on how to implement pending changes level 2. By the time it was closed in June, there was no longer a consensus to use pending changes level 2 at all, but if and when such a consensus does develop, there is some consensus on when to apply it.
- October 2016: DC RFC 2016 opened to determine if the edit filter, bots and ORES should be allowed to defer suspicious edits for review using deferred changes. The RfC passed in its entirety.
- November 2016: PC RFC 2016 #1 opened to propose lowering the auto-accept threshold for PC2 and establish usage criteria.
- November 2016: snow-closedwith consensus against all remaining proposed changes.
- January 2017: RFC to remove pending changes level 2, after all RFCs on the subject failed to achieve consensus for using it.
- November 2017: The proposal for implementing deferred changes was marked as dormant, following a lack of work on its technical implementation.
See also
- edit filter, and/or ORES to defer suspect edits for review (originally Wikipedia:Deferred revisions).
- Wikipedia:Flagged protection and patrolled revisions, the original trial proposal.
- Wikipedia:Patrolled revisions, a request for a passive reviewing system, part of the original proposal.
- Wikipedia:PC2012, an overview of the 2012 implementation of pending changes.
- Wikipedia:Pending changes blocks, proposal for a form of user specific editing restriction that is to a classic block what pending changes protection is to classic protection.
- Wikipedia:Pending changes caveats, an essay on why the use of pending changes was severely limited.
- Wikipedia:Timed flagged revisions, a proposal to add timed autoreview to Pending Changes, to function as a softer(broader) protection tool.
Interface
- Special:PendingChanges, pages with pending edits.
- Special:StablePages, pages under pending changes.
- Special:ValidationStatistics, various statistics pertaining to the Pending Changes feature.
- Template:Pending Changes backlog, a display of the current backlog, which can be added to user pages.
Logs
- Special:Log/stable, actions to enable or disable pending changes.
Footnotes
- ^ "⚓ T189422 Disabling pending changes removes visual highlighting and labelling of reverts and accepts". phabricator.wikimedia.org. Retrieved 26 April 2019.
- ^ As of September 2018, there are no protections weaker than pending changes level 1 (PC1), therefore PC1 will not interfere when other protections are enabled.