So, I go to your site, and I see a problem with a page, and I click on the Edit link, and I make the change, and I go back to...
not your site and the change is there.
your site, and the change is *not* there.
Neither of those seems perfect.
I think this is a little cost for the mirror. Our users are informed that their editings are loaded back to us at next mirror time. I find this more useful than no links to original Wikipedia and better than no mirror. For us is no need off an daily (or hourly) up-to-date encyclopaedia. We find two to four updates per month adequate.
Look, we are presenting the Wipedia data in our own design. They are also integrated in our "E-Paper" which is an additional offer to our paper readers (see http://epaper.rhein-zeitung.de/06/04/23/ , load an article and doubleclick any noun)
Those people completely off the grid shouldn't have Wikipedia at all?
Surely not. For this purpose offline copies works perfect. But they are not XORed to online dumps.
jo