Template talk:CurrMY

About rewriting statements "as of YYYY-MM-DD" into "as of currMY"

I'm not sure I feel comfortable with the idea of changing phrases like "as of year/month/day" into "as of {{currMY}}". Before the change, it seems to be a specific statement, which is either true (and will remain true) or false (and will remain false). After the change, it is not a specific statement anymore -- rather, it becomes a whole sequence of different statements, some of which might be true and others might be false. I think it might be better to have in the wiki (sometimes) an obsolete information with specific date, rather than true statements (sometimes) automatically becoming false statements. Confocal (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I agree with this. HotdogPi (talk) 19:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

ditto Book (talk) 22:36, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

For a statement "as of {{currMY}}, no pattern with such property exists", it will remain true as long as no such pattern exists, and it is more up-to-date than using "as of year/month/day" when somebody just happened to think of checking the status. When a pattern with such property is found, it is expected for editors to delete in time the statement that has just shortly become false and add a description for the fresh discovery. What is the point of keeping a misleading (by virture of being outdated, not reflecting recent situation) statement of non-existence of something if nobody intends to update it? (Note: on the other hand I am fine with an existential statement like "as of year/month/day, one or more pattern with such property exists"; even if outdated it is verifiable and less misleading than the contrary.) GUYTU6J (talk) 03:02, 23 February 2023 (UTC)