On May 26, 2006, at 6:44 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
This is from a
talk page of a featured article:
" Beyond which, this is an FA, and FA's really should be treated
as more
finalized and finished than general articles, as they have passed
through
a
form of peer review and have a community endorsement in their present
forms."
Is this view supported anywhere? Should I be more careful when
editing a
FA,
since it should be supposed that the article is good as it is and
does not
need a change?
Yes, this is the general view. In particular, don't add unsourced
statements
to a fully sourced article, don't add spelling mistakes to a proofread
article etc. I would like us to formalise this.
Featured articles should have guardians who fearlessly revert bad
changes like this while taking useful contributions and massaging
them into the featured whole. This would work a lot better than the
salutory neglect system we employ now. I know this sounds ominously
like WP:OWN, but it's needed.
--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch