> > Does anyone want to argue for a policy that says "Wikipedia does not > record events until they are x days/months old"? >
Yes, this would solve a large number of problems (not least resolving the "historical significance" issue). If the lifecycle of an article that involves current news is: > > Stable article -> [news event happens] -> article chaos -> heavily > edited/recentist -> calms down but still recentist -> stable and due > weight accorded to event. Many articles are still in a shoddy state of repair - current events keep on happening, and people willing to spend the time ensuring articles stick to policy and avoid the worst SPA problems are constantly moving on to the next one. Past events languish. Even then; during this period they are not good "news", they are a quickly changing record - often inaccurate and usually poorly written. WN is better set up to cope with this process. Some of our very worst content is about recent events. Tom _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
