On 8/6/07, Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com wrote:
While I get your point KP, I think either you or I may have missed the working of this. I gathered that its not how long its been there, per se, but how many edits its survived more or less intact. So those physics articles, while long standing, are as you say rarely edited, and the software would not put trust into its content.
Oh, maybe. So, if it's never edited, it hasn't survived a lot of edits more or less intact, because there were no edits to survive.
Well, I came across a sad article looking at it.
I'll have to think on it some more, because I just don't think that's an indicator of accurate content.
KP