The new guidance seems intended to promote greater collaboration on pre-1700 profiles. Well and good! But that does seem to raise some questions:
1. There can be multiple projects interested in a particular profile. So if you want to work on that profile, how many projects do you need to contact?
2. The concept of documenting changes and being able to change back, with its attendant note on be daring, be creative, take risks, if you make a mistake it can always be fixed -- seems a bit at variance with this.
3. So far in my experience on WikiTree, there's been trial and error involved in getting the right proportion of checking things out ahead of time, and just going ahead and doing something, figuring somebody will straighten me out if I did something controversial. If I KNOW something is likely to be controversial, i.e, making a change that will destroy a thousand WikiTreer's link back to Charlemagne, collaboration seems like an excellent way of spreading the blame!
4. It would seem like promoting collaboration before creating a pre-1700 profile would put a major crimp in people uploading GEDCOMs that include pre-1700 people. Will this new approach actually have an impact on unsourced GEDCOM's?
5. My experience so far is that the "Project Protected" label is an indication, "be careful, somebody cares" about this profile. It has not stopped me from actually doing something. I'll look at the content and the changes section, and see if anybody ACTUALLY seems to care. If yes, then there are people to collaborate with. If no, then no matter what the labels, nobody seems to.
6. If "Project Protected" meant that there was an actual block on editing without an advance OK, I think that would be a serious impediment to the attractiveness of WikiTree. The wikipedia model assumes that a lot of the collaboration will come from the actual process of editing, "I'm making it this way.....no, it needs to be this way.....hmnn, we need to get our heads together to resolve this."
7. It is easier to get forgiveness than permission.