419:
consensus view of events from that time, but I can't see a lot of new information coming out that would make it impossible to write about it with a reasonable view. More to the point - the 10YEARSTEST was 10 years until now, a bold change is fine, but given a few people have opined we should change it back, I think it should stand at 10 unless there is a good consensus that it should be lengthened. This just an essay, not a formal guideline or policy so maybe you want to write your own separate 20YEARSTEST essay to talk about major events like the
Depression or WWII.
361:
arbitrary. We could have chosen 5 years, 10 years, 15 years, 20 years, or 25 years. I do think 10 years is a bit short of a period since the event could still be fresh on people's minds. I think that a 100-year test would be too long since there is a lot of uncertainty about what the world would look like 100 years from now. I think that for most events, doing a 20 year test is reasonable since the event is not fresh on people's minds and also not too far away in the future.
154:
213:
185:
123:
277:
492:
fast-changing events that need such precision for clarity, such as a war), this is essentially instant recentism and merits editing down to a less precise date. When I come across situations like this, I will consider whether or not the month or year is the right level of precision; it's almost always year. Is there a guideline that addresses this, or am I just off the hook here?
199:
515:
People or events for which most of the coverage was published before 1994 tend not to have a large internet footprint. But doing a google, pointing to the lack of results and then AfD-ing the article is just lazy. Just because it's difficult (or even impossible) to find on the internet doesn't mean
491:
We often see that when an event happens, many editors will add it to the relevant article with a rather precise date, such as "on 30 July 2023, Mr. X stated that
Knowledge is awesome." It's my view that unless the specific date itself is notable to the topic (such as the chronology of a topic with
360:
As the editor who changed it to 20 year test, I would be happy to explain my reasoning behind the change. The reason why I made this change was because I think the ten-year test is a little too soon to get a good historical evaluation for an event. I understand that the choice of 10 years is a bit
403:
The problem with 10 years is recent memory, not just living memory. People who voted for and against Obama might not have enough information to evaluate it properly even unbiased people. We are still feeling the effects of NAFTA or the
Patriot Act as an example. Think about it. Imagine evaluating
418:
Those examples are all massive world events that involved millions of people and multiple countries - what about more mundane things? As far as Obama, he's been out of office since 2016. But something that happened in 2013 or earlier is settled. Sure, there may still be changes in the historical
375:
I'm not sure I agree. 10 years is not arbitrary, 10 years is the decade, the standard unit of generational measure and also the basis of our decimal system used for everything from money to science to calculators and computers. Let's try it. 10 years ago was
380:. Can we write about events of that year and feel confident that it is distant? I would say yes we can write about Obama's 2nd term. That is now historical. Actually, 2013 kind of seems quaint.
539:
290:
257:
114:
549:
39:
74:
267:
220:
98:
80:
544:
110:
106:
102:
229:
20:
198:
69:
190:
165:
501:
404:
World War I in 1928, the Great
Depression in 1939, and World War II in 1955. I still think 20 years is the way to go.
60:
122:
93:
474:
409:
366:
233:
133:
469:: Thanks. I'm glad that I was able to work with everyone to find a reasonable compromise between all parties.
320:
286:
451:. I find this change to be an agreeable resolution to all the points and concerns made in this discussion.
494:
171:
521:
470:
444:
405:
362:
50:
24:
426:
387:
345:
316:
138:
65:
330:
I am curious about this change as well. I agree that some discussion on this would be in order.
456:
335:
46:
225:
135:
517:
228:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
533:
421:
398:
382:
355:
466:
452:
349:
331:
447:: Thank you for explaining your rationale, engaging in discussion, and for making
137:
525:
505:
478:
460:
430:
413:
391:
370:
339:
324:
276:
212:
184:
377:
224:, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of
147:
139:
15:
275:
315:
Can we please talk about changing it back to 10 year test?
448:
511:A related issue is "internetism" or "googleism"
540:High-impact WikiProject Knowledge essays pages
8:
293:on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.
179:
164:does not require a rating on Knowledge's
181:
7:
153:
151:
170:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
550:WikiProject Knowledge essays pages
248:WikiProject Knowledge essays pages
232:. For a listing of essays see the
14:
218:This page is within the scope of
211:
197:
183:
152:
121:
40:Click here to start a new topic.
311:Why was 10:YT changed to 20YT?
1:
526:02:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
479:23:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
461:23:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
431:23:39, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
414:22:24, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
392:00:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
371:00:29, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
37:Put new text under old text.
340:18:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
325:22:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
262:This page has been rated as
242:Knowledge:WikiProject Essays
221:WikiProject Knowledge essays
245:Template:WikiProject Essays
45:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
566:
487:Appropriate date precision
545:NA-Class Knowledge essays
506:02:07, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
283:
261:
206:
178:
75:Be welcoming to newcomers
287:automatically assessed
280:
268:project's impact scale
70:avoid personal attacks
285:The above rating was
279:
115:Auto-archiving period
516:it's not notable.
281:
166:content assessment
81:dispute resolution
42:
496:Orange Suede Sofa
306:
305:
302:
301:
298:
297:
294:
146:
145:
61:Assume good faith
38:
557:
499:
497:
429:
402:
390:
359:
284:
250:
249:
246:
243:
240:
226:Knowledge essays
215:
208:
207:
202:
201:
200:
195:
187:
180:
157:
156:
155:
148:
140:
126:
125:
116:
16:
565:
564:
560:
559:
558:
556:
555:
554:
530:
529:
513:
495:
493:
489:
471:Interstellarity
445:Interstellarity
425:
406:Interstellarity
396:
386:
363:Interstellarity
353:
313:
247:
244:
241:
238:
237:
234:essay directory
196:
193:
142:
141:
136:
113:
87:
86:
56:
12:
11:
5:
563:
561:
553:
552:
547:
542:
532:
531:
512:
509:
488:
485:
484:
483:
482:
481:
441:
440:
439:
438:
437:
436:
435:
434:
433:
312:
309:
304:
303:
300:
299:
296:
295:
282:
272:
271:
260:
254:
253:
251:
216:
204:
203:
188:
176:
175:
169:
158:
144:
143:
134:
132:
131:
128:
127:
89:
88:
85:
84:
77:
72:
63:
57:
55:
54:
43:
34:
33:
30:
29:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
562:
551:
548:
546:
543:
541:
538:
537:
535:
528:
527:
523:
519:
510:
508:
507:
503:
498:
486:
480:
476:
472:
468:
464:
463:
462:
458:
454:
450:
446:
442:
432:
428:
424:
423:
417:
416:
415:
411:
407:
400:
395:
394:
393:
389:
385:
384:
379:
374:
373:
372:
368:
364:
357:
351:
347:
346:MaximusEditor
343:
342:
341:
337:
333:
329:
328:
327:
326:
322:
318:
317:MaximusEditor
310:
308:
292:
288:
278:
274:
273:
269:
265:
259:
256:
255:
252:
235:
231:
227:
223:
222:
217:
214:
210:
209:
205:
192:
189:
186:
182:
177:
173:
167:
163:
159:
150:
149:
130:
129:
124:
120:
112:
108:
104:
100:
97:
95:
91:
90:
82:
78:
76:
73:
71:
67:
64:
62:
59:
58:
52:
48:
47:Learn to edit
44:
41:
36:
35:
32:
31:
26:
22:
18:
17:
514:
490:
420:
381:
314:
307:
263:
219:
172:WikiProjects
162:project page
161:
118:
92:
19:This is the
264:High-impact
194:High‑impact
534:Categories
518:MaxBrowne2
230:discussion
449:this edit
83:if needed
66:Be polite
25:Recentism
21:talk page
399:Andrevan
356:Andrevan
119:730 days
94:Archives
51:get help
467:Sal2100
453:Sal2100
350:Sal2100
332:Sal2100
266:on the
352:, and
289:using
239:Essays
191:Essays
168:scale.
422:Andre
383:Andre
160:This
99:Index
79:Seek
27:page.
522:talk
502:talk
475:talk
457:talk
410:talk
378:2013
367:talk
336:talk
321:talk
291:data
258:High
68:and
348:, @
536::
524:)
504:)
477:)
459:)
427:🚐
412:)
388:🚐
369:)
338:)
323:)
117::
109:,
105:,
101:,
49:;
520:(
500:(
473:(
465:@
455:(
443:@
408:(
401::
397:@
365:(
358::
354:@
344:@
334:(
319:(
270:.
236:.
174::
111:3
107:2
103:1
96::
53:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
