It's an earnest desire to have the project show the most accurate information that you can reasonably make it.
I've been guilty of feeling the death-edit urge, but not only for death editing but for anything else I hear about that is a simple yet significant change.
In some cases, like I did upon David Brudnoy's death a few years ago, you find out through this process not only that the article doesn't state that he is dead, but actually doesn't say much about them at all -- and in a way, fleshing out a weak article on someone is almost like a tribute. Like how one might feel when writing an obit about a well-known figure.
Likewise, if Frizzelle were to quit the Stranger and hand over EIC to Eli or someone, or if the paper were bought by VV, etc., I'd likely be here within minutes, and updating the page -- if necessary -- to be up-to-date and accurate.
Cause that's what good information should be.
This was an Onion article, about the guy who changed Heath Ledger's Wikipedia entry to reflect his death. Is it weird that an Onion article basically became a real-life mainstream media article?
Cujus vulturis hoc erit cadaver? (Martial Epigrams 4.62.4)
I came here to say what 2 said. All hail number two!
the internet is a race.
"First" is also "soonest outdated". Better to be last.
Exercise, exercise, exercise people!
Comments are closed on this post.