Wikipedia:Protected edit user right

Currently, the Main page and its component templates and images, and high-risk templates which are used on an extremely large number of pages or substituted with great frequency, are fully protected indefinitely, due to the high visibility of even a single act of vandalism, and a history of vandalism sprees focusing on these pages. As a result, they presently can only be edited by administrators. Modification of pages in the MediaWiki namespace is also restricted to administrators without exception. It is proposed that a user right be created to permit edits to fully protected pages by trusted users with a history of productive contributions, assignable or removable by any bureaucrat.

Benefits

 * 1) Many users could contribute useful edits to content appearing on the main page, or high-risk templates, but do not wish to undertake traditional administrative tasks such as blocking, deletion, and page protection, or are wary of undergoing an RFA process designed to properly vet editors asking to be entrusted with every administrative tool.
 * 2) Modifying a page is a characteristically editorial task, unlike traditional administrative actions such as disabling an account, removing a page from public view, or restricting editing of a page. The presence of certain pages which non-admins are categorically forbidden to edit is contrary to the ideas that "anyone can edit" (to the greatest extent possible) and adminship is "no big deal". Permanent admin-only protection is a hack designed to avoid the damaging consequences of vandalism to the site interface, the main page, or templates appearing on millions of pages, left over from the days when there few flavors of user rights, no other feasible solution existed, and RFA standards were lower, such that any respected user who had been editing for a reasonable period of time could become an administrator. The present situation, in which many respected non-admin editors who have been contributing to Wikipedia for years are implicitly told that even they are not trusted to edit certain highly sensitive pages is unsatisfactory.

Cautions
No extension of the circumstances under which pages may be fully protected should result. In view of the principle that "anyone can edit", full protection should continue to be used sparingly to avoid locking new and unregistered users out. Non-admins exercising this user right to edit pages fully protected due to edit wars would be expected to adhere to the same standards as administrators. In particular, deliberate use of the right to continue an edit war would result in summary revocation, and an immediate block by any administrator until a bureaucrat could be found to remove the right.

Why assignment and revocation of this right should be limited to bureaucrats
Granting the responsibility to properly vet editors for the exercise of right which could cause significant security problems if misused to administrators would tremendously expand the scope of administrative authority, further increasing RFA standards, and eroding the principle that adminship is "no big deal". Creation of an asymmetric interface, in which the right could only be granted by a bureaucrat, but could be removed by any administrator (for speed in responding to abuse) is undesirable, since it would stack the deck in favour of removal, creating the prospect of an administrative action which no administrator could reverse. It would be expected that, like an administrator when blocked, users with the protected edit right would be unable to modify fully protected pages, and that, unlike a blocked administrator, a user with the right would be unable to self-unblock, as a technical restriction.

Why community discussion of this feature request is necessary
While developer action would ultimately be required to implement a protected edit user right, developers are far more likely to act where the community has recognized a need. Indeed, it's generally expected that new user rights will not come into existence on Wikipedia without prior discussion. The actual technical complexity of implementing the user right is believed to be low, in comparison to more involved features such as pending changes.