`  == Harizotoh9: removal of well-sourced material (NY Times) ==  : I saw you made this edit removing the discussion of the New York Times front-page editorial. In your edit summary, you claimed: ``wont' be notable in a short time.`` That is just flat wrong, and it's an unexplained ipse dixit to boot.    The last time a front-page editorial ran on the cover the Times was 95 years ago. (Specifically, June 13, 1920). It is obviously historically significant when the country's leading paper does something so rare. And this fact was recognized globally; the decision to publish on the front page generated extensive attention, by, to name just a few of literally hundreds: BBC News, the Washington Post, the NYT itself, The Daily Beast (interview with NYT executive editor Dean Baquet on the decision), and NPR, Reuters, The Independent, and on and on. It has been the subject of articles published by The Poynter Institute and the Cato Institute. Given all this, there is no justification for not covering it, as I think the vast majority of editors here would agree...  `