On 3 November 2011 17:56, Carcharoth <carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
The thing is that with a better classified
backlog you'd get some easier
progress. If you Google the topic of these older articles, you tend to
get
mirror material back, so I don't know that it
is fair to ask newbies to
sue
their own unsupported initiative.
Sue? Was that meant to be "use"? I agree, some backlogs are better
dealt with by more experienced editors. How can such slicing and
dicing be done? And if there were manageable chunks, I'd do bits as
well.
I think quite a lot could be done with Catscan 2.0, searching high-level
categories for pages carrying the {{unreferenced}} template. Something like
[[Category:Places]] or [[Category:American people stubs]] to some
subcategory depth. It's a sophisticated gadget, and the toolserver is said
to be sickly right now. But I imagine a determined operative could come up
with useful listings that would be better for the purpose of chipping 1%
off unreferenced articles.
Charles