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