On 12/21/05, Brion Vibber brion@pobox.com wrote:
Articles are continuously edited over time. As time goes on, ever-newer versions will be marked as the stable version which is first shown to the public.
Yes, but only after lengthened amounts of consensus...
If that means "no-one could edit them", then we already have that model! You
can't change a given revision on Wikipedia; you can only make a new revision based on it.
But even worse, today when we freeze an article to show a stable revision, *nobody* can edit it except an elite cabal of sysops. Is that "open"? Is that "free"?
I haven't yet heard of anyone freezing an article to create a stable version. The concept of a stable version doesn't yet exist. Sure, FAs are semi-stable, and all edits to them are generally perused and checked, but that doesn't mean they're not full open. So that argument doesn't work - we *never* freeze an article today to show a stable version!