Toby Bartels wrote:
Zoe wrote (sarcastically):
Oh, good, I like that. Let's change all the
rules intermittantly, thus
requiring someone to go back to all of the articles that were created under
the old rules and have to change all of them. That makes a lot of sense.
I'd propose that those that were the primary supporters of such a change
be the ones required to go over and change things. That's only fair.
I have no objection to that, either in this issue or any other that can
have an impact on a large number of articles. In practical terms, the
important thing becomes maintaining compatibility during transition.. I
wouldn't expect that the people who might object to such a change would
be too keen to work at it.
Eclecticology