I completely agree with locking completed articles.
Why should they be
edited if they're done?
Articles are never permanently "done", stuff happens. :)
Even articles on ancient history need updating as new
discoveries, new theories and new perspectives arise.
Our idea of what good prose looks like also changes
with time.
Anyone who's worked with 1911-Britannica entries is
familiar with the above problems.
Regards,
Haukur