Timeline for Should an answer be rewritten completely if new external info becomes available?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 19, 2023 at 2:07 | answer | added | KRyan | timeline score: 8 | |
| Apr 17, 2023 at 21:05 | comment | added | ESCE | FWIW, my (perchance flawed) rationale in just edit-replacing instead of writing a new answer was partially influenced by the fact that my original answer mentioned that the item was already marked for errata - so it felt more like an "update" than a new answer. And that seemed a lot more convenient than making a new answer and deleting my old, while better preserving the history. Of course, editing an accepted answer to be different is... risky. The errata was unambiguous enough here that I wasn't worried about that either. Also @Anagkai thanks for making a meta question on this! :) | |
| Apr 14, 2023 at 1:14 | history | became hot meta post | |||
| Apr 13, 2023 at 20:34 | history | edited | Anagkai | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Clarification
|
| Apr 13, 2023 at 18:34 | comment | added | Thomas Markov | Thoughtful answers to this meta should consider that the SOP is probably different when editing your own obsolete answer vs. editing someone else’s. | |
| Apr 13, 2023 at 18:31 | review | Close votes | |||
| Apr 13, 2023 at 21:19 | |||||
| Apr 13, 2023 at 18:10 | history | asked | Anagkai | CC BY-SA 4.0 |