Well I completely agree with @SevenSidedDie. It's typically useful to have obsolete information around, but I can't think for one minute that the same holds for
dangerous content. Blame my chemistry background for my example: If an answer in chem.SE is invalidated because of the newer IUPAC rules of nomenclature, then a new answer is more preferable, stating
separately how the new rules hold. But if the answer is about handling a dangerous chemical, which is later proved to be a wrong way of handling, then I hardly think the consensus would be "leave the answer alone", let alone editing. —
inɒzɘmɒЯ.A.M 2 days ago