> I'll say that the vast majority of current classic sites are extremely old and inactive, and not receiving any traffic in the last two years (editors or visit

> I'll say that the vast majority of current classic sites are extremely old and inactive, and not receiving any traffic in the last two years (editors or visitors). That content is old does not make it worthless. That it's not receiving visitors (much less for as little as 2 years) does not make it worthless. If you're ever looking for the historical reason of something, the answer is probably going to be in a source that nobody's laid eyes on for several, several years.