It's a problem with any trope that has an absolute qualifier to it, as there are so many different types of story arcs that people struggle to comprehend an abrupt conclusion is still a conclusion or a Cryptic Background Reference doesn't mean it was supposed to become the next Myth Arc. "Wait until the work is finished" has a lot more problems, including Un-Canceled, Sequel Series, Revival, Arc Welding and a Comic-Book Adaptation. It's a trope we have to play by ear on those outlier cases.
The page itself admits that an arc can be revived and still be the trope, as there are examples of a villain swearing revenge and disappearing for five years without any comment. After four years how is an editor supposed to know that plot would become important again? In such cases I don't think you need to erase the previous example but can add a comment on how the plot returned and how long that gap of time was.
Relatedly, I've thought about proposing a new Playing With A Trope type called Retconned Trope, which is when assumptions are made that a trope is in play only for later revelations to clarify it is something else. Aborted Arc would be one type of example. Another would be a character is revealed to be Secretly Wealthy, but a year later we discover they maxed out their credit cards and are actually in gross debt. The original trope was technically never applicable, but in the moment it appeared to be.
Comics are just words and pictures. You can do anything with words and pictures.

Aborted Arc is when a creator abandons a storyline without giving it a conclusion. But what do we do when the creator resumes the storyline years after it was thought to be over? Do we delete the example since it's now an averted trope? Do we keep it for historical purposes, but note that the arc did get an ending? Or do we move it to another trope (Sequel Gap, perhaps?). Asking because I found the following in Batman: