Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/June 16, 2013

=Suggested edit to this page= "Raising white ducks became popular in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, England in the 18th century". Missing comma after England. See MOS:COMMA.Inglok (talk) 09:32, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure I see the point in editing this now that it's off the main page. Any changes to TFA blurbs after they have come off the main page rewrites history to an extent. BencherliteTalk 09:39, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It's on Main_Page/Yesterday and it takes about 10 seconds. Inglok (talk) 10:02, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, it would only take a few seconds, but that's not the point. I can see things I'd like to change at Today's featured article/June 2012, just a year ago, let alone Today's featured article/June 2007, for example,  but there is no reason to give TFA blurbs copy-edits after they come off the main page, which is where they are designed to be displayed. BencherliteTalk 10:13, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Why not? Inglok (talk) 10:27, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * "Any changes to TFA blurbs after they have come off the main page rewrites history to an extent", as I said at the start. The blurbs are an archive of what was actually displayed on the main page, not what we would like them to look like in retrospect. BencherliteTalk 10:31, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * We're not 'rewriting history'. A page's edit history is stored. That's the basis of a wiki. Is what you are advocating policy? Inglok (talk) 11:03, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * After over 50,000 edits and over 5 years as an administrator (not to mention six months or so as one of the TFA delegates), I am well aware of the basis of a wiki. But people shouldn't be expected to hunt through the page history of a blurb to see what was actually displayed on 16th June 2013 or 16th June 2007 as compared to what later editors thought would be a better way of improving the blurb's content, grammar, punctuation, wikilinks or anything else. BencherliteTalk 11:16, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd really rather see solid references to what has been decided by consensus. Where does it say that blurbs are an archive not to be touched? Thanks Inglok (talk) 11:32, 17 June 2013 (UTC)