Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-24531999-20160514180240/@comment-1757994-20160523191637

Dessamator wrote: Wikia's content review isn't about catching errors or any other code quality issue. Although they say code that causes errors will be rejected(ref), it's completely about whether the change opens any JavaScript authentication/authorization holes. I'm pretty sure reviewers only look at the code. They don't actually test it.
 * Automatically rejecting scripts with fatal errors - This recently happened to me and Rappy kindly corrected it. That was a simple error caused by a random unnoticed keyboard press. The module namespace has a nifty checkbox to block erroneous pages that could be re-used here.

I think a bigger problem would be at dev, where any autoconfirmed user can edit any module imported by any (possibly several) wikis. The edit can break the module, but still get approved, and reverting it would also have to be approved, so in the meantime it's broken. Any admins who import conditionally via Common.js would even be blocked from removing the broken module, since that's a change that has to get approved, too. It's a disaster waiting to happen.