QUOTE(Random832 @ Tue 25th March 2008, 3:18pm)
On a more serious note, this provides a technical means for e.g. BLPs to be locked in such a way as that only a version approved by a trusted user is shown to casual readers or to search engines.
Well, let's be fair - this actually has little to do with the BLP issue. It will probably mean a general improvement in Wikipedia content overall, just because of the immediate reduction in petty vandalism. I suppose it's possible that some "vandal-fighters" will get bored due to the lack of AnonIP and throwaway-SPA vandals, and possibly become vandals themselves, but that's highly theoretical. Either way, some vandalism will almost certainly continue, it will just become more creative and subtle. (And hopefully funnier, but I'm not going to hold my breath...)
As far as BLP is concerned, edit-approval will almost certainly be used as yet another counter-argument against an opt-out policy, since no established or "trusted" WP user will accept the idea that non-throwaway "trusted" accounts would ever be used for revenge purposes in BLP articles. Personally though, I'd say there are plenty of terrible BLP situations that are caused almost exclusively by established users, including quite a few admins.
If you look further into the future, there could be a fair amount of user attrition resulting from edit approval, simply because vandal-fighting is part of the fun. The attrition would of course be followed by a drive to add technical features to make up for the reduction in head-count. Once added, the new features will allow (if not directly implement) the "lockdown phase," at which point many of us who are currently attacking WP pretty much willy-nilly will simply pack it in for lack of drama. They could delay the lockdown phase for quite some time if they want to, but I'm betting they won't want to.