But Eventualism implies that articles will get better over time, that the
article's value over the long term matters more than its value in the short
term. I think Destructionism raises the point that article quality goes in
both directions, which is a point worth making whatever it's called.
And to those asking for an example, not to be glib, but here's a place to
start:
On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Carcharoth <carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com>wrote;wrote:
On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 3:13 AM, William Beutler
<williambeutler(a)gmail.com> wrote:
As little as I wish to speak for him, nor do I
wish to summarize David,
but
I think he's talking about a different thing,
not about FAs, but how
quality
articles evolve over time, especially as major
facts (or received wisdom)
changes. In that case, I default to the status quo on en-wp, which I
think
is better than not, as I'm sure most of us
do.
Maybe "Constructionism" as an opposite to "Destructionism"?
I think another term used is "eventualism".
Carcharoth
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l