On 14 August 2010 05:37, stevertigo stvrtg@gmail.com wrote:
Tony Sidaway tonysidaway@gmail.com wrote:
Of course the older revisions remain in the history and anybody is free to extract a snapshot that he considers to be superior to the present one.
I just did this at [[matter]], but the issue though is that there's no way to really see what gold exists in previous versions, unless you know what already exists there and understand what erosion has taken place.
I've had to investigate articles in the past and there are some effective time-saving methods such as: looking at the editing as composed of different waves, characterized by the identity of the major editors; performing diffs at timely intervals (three or six months, say) to identify large scale changes. You might miss a shortlived improvement of course, but you still pick up on any significant trends in degradation.