User blog comment:Kirkburn/Technical Update: July 25, 2016/@comment-24014422-20160728191617/@comment-452-20160803222642

I've always considered the User_blog namespace being locked while the User namespace isn't to be inconsistent.


 * Every reason I've ever heard for the User namespace to remain open is a reason to unlock the User_blog namespace.
 * Every reason I've ever heard for the User_blog namespace to remain locked is a reason to lock the User namespace in the same way.

The benefits of restricting editing in the User_blog namespace have never really felt like they strongly outweigh the disadvantages of locking the User_blog namespace.

For example, users sometimes include text that others will want to update on their blog posts - e.g. links to renamed pages, links to templates that no longer exist, etc.

In general, I avoid locking things down too much. To that end, I've allowed all users to rename Files, to suppress redirects, and to edit archived user_talk pages. There have been no incidents due to these additional rights being granted to all users.

I put in a support request yesterday to remove this inconsistency by adding "blog-articles-edit" to the group "Users".

While I would prefer that the User namespace be locked to their owners, allowing all editors to edit blog posts would be consistent with all the reasons for keeping the User namespace open.

I have received the response that it is "a pretty unusual request".

So, Wikia Staff refuse to restrict the editing of pages in User namespace because they "want to avoid locking things down too much", while simultaneously claiming that it's an "unusual request" to "want to avoid locking things down too much" in the User_blog namespace.