Lars Aronsson wrote:
Brion Vibber wrote:
I've only skimmed these posts, but they seem to boil down to historical trivia ("we had 24 articles not 12!") and saying we should do things
Actually the article is a lot better than that. It's an important piece of history in the writing. I'm looking forward to the book. Larry is very careful to point out that he is Wikipedia's friend and I see no conflict.
The entire discussion is a perfect illustration of why we want to have a historian assemble all the individual and sometimes-conflicting accounts into a coherent story, publish it, then summarize *that* for WP's article about itself. Even though the events happened only a couple years ago, some of the relevant documents have apparently already disappeared, and everybody is having to dredge through their personal memories, which are less reliable.
Stan