On May 26, 2006, at 6:44 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
This is from a talk page of a featured article:
" Beyond which, this is an FA, and FA's really should be treated as more finalized and finished than general articles, as they have passed through a form of peer review and have a community endorsement in their present forms."
Is this view supported anywhere? Should I be more careful when editing a FA, since it should be supposed that the article is good as it is and does not need a change?
Yes, this is the general view. In particular, don't add unsourced statements to a fully sourced article, don't add spelling mistakes to a proofread article etc. I would like us to formalise this.
Featured articles should have guardians who fearlessly revert bad changes like this while taking useful contributions and massaging them into the featured whole. This would work a lot better than the salutory neglect system we employ now. I know this sounds ominously like WP:OWN, but it's needed.