When I was still editing (before the, ahem, unfortunate circumstances),
I found this to be a good way to do things. If I tagged a new article
with a generic {{stub}}, often the user who sorted the article into a
deeper category also improved it dramatically, in ways that my editing
style never allowed me to do. It simply called more human editors to the
attention of the article, which is always beneficial so long as they do
so in the spirit of collaboration and not in the spirit of combat (which
is often the case),
Steve Bennett wrote:
On 4/11/07, Bryan Derksen
<bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca> wrote:
My own pet peeve along these lines is articles
with no categories other
than various subject-specific stub categories added by subject-specific
stub tags. Why go to the trouble of sorting and specifying the type of
stub it is and not add the actual categories at the same time? Seems
like such a trivial extra step, we could even have a bot doing the work.
IMHO it is a mistake to criticise people for not doing work. We can
criticise them when they do harm. But doing 10 minutes of work, and
not the other 2 minutes...well, that's perfectly valid in the wiki
world, imho.
In any case, I frequently create stubs in areas I know nothing about,
and simply don't know what the best categories are. So I might end up
using something really generic like "Sports" or "People" or
something
and letting someone else refine it.
Steve
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l