On 10/11/05, Michael Turley <michael.turley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
OK, now the question *I should have* asked.
How is a moving a marker to designate a preferred version functionally
*better* than simply reverting to a chosen edit in the article's
history?
Sometimes it's useful to have additional "in progress" information in an
article. That new information might not be completely fleshed out and
presented in the perfect way, or maybe it is well presented but just hasn't
been fact-checked by anyone other than the original author. It still is
useful, though.
Think of it like software development, with a stable and a current branch.
There's bleeding-edge-not-quite-fact-checked Wikipedia and there's
stable-fact-checked Wikipedia. All without forking or protection of pages.
The trick I think is making "marker movement" a slower process than article
development. That's where I think a process like the FAC process comes into
play.
--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused
Anthony