On 4/10/06, Mathias Schindler neubau@presroi.de wrote:
Personally, I think we should stick with defining fixed criteria for FAs, and considering Wikipedia complete when 100% of articles are FAs.
If you mean "fixed" as in "feel free to specify or improve", I agree to the first part.
I meant fixed as a direct contrast to constantly moving goalposts, particularly those that serve to strip former FAs of their status, when the article itself hasn't changed.
If the world would stop spinning around, scientists stopped their work, wars ended and so one, Wikipedia would be complete when 100% of the relevant things and concepts in this reality would be FAs.
There, I meant "complete" as "comprehensive". Wikipedia should of course keep evolving with the world. But necessarily there should come a point where it does not need to change as fast as it currently is. We're playing catch-up.
Steve