[Foundation-l] Yet another reason to have a "stable article" system

Tue Dec 20 02:22:45 UTC 2005

The article on Christmas is set to be on the Main Page on December 25th. 

It used to be Featured quality. That was a year ago. Since then, it has 
had 600 major edits, 500 other edits, and is nearly unreadable.

Compare the originally Featured version to the current version:  
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Christmas&diff=32012542&oldid=8777491

Now, it is up for FARC:  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_removal_candidates/Christmas

To prevent stagnated articles from being presented as "top quality" on 
the Main Page, there seems to be two solutions: set a time limit for 
Featured Articles, which requires them to be renominated on FAC if they 
become too different from their original Featured versions; or, 
implement the "stable article" option that Tim Starling has talked 
about, which would allow admins to set a "last good version" to be 
presented to the public at all times, while the real version is somehow 
edited "behind the scenes". As productive edits pile up, admins can set 
a newer version as the "last good version".  While this can still result 
in an article being drastically-changed, it is much more likely to be 
changed for the better in the long run.

brian0918