On 29/03/2008, David Goodman dgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:
For any system with approved articles, one does need a system of making corrections. This is one of the reasons I''m rather skeptical about such schemes--they grow very cumbersome. this proposal is a good illustration.
I agree, but I'm not sure that they're not more or less inevitable. Perhaps the wikipedia bureaucracy around at least some approved articles will eventually grow to the point where you don't correct the article, instead you raise a bug report and an approved editor will correct the problem?
I could see that happening *eventually*, on very well established and/or particularly contentious articles.
-- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG