I think it has basically been resolved that this kind of thing is in
fact a Bad Thing and as such will not be repeated in any future such
project. The WikiProject Cricket's reputation for intransigence is a
direct consequence of repeated AfDs and a reluctance to delete hours
of work, a feeling that anyone who has written articles will
understand.
If people were more prepared to take the charitable view and ask
people not to work in this way, they might have been more amenable
than the strong-arm tactics that have generally been taken. Maybe
that's all a little late in this dispute but it is worth recognising
in the future.
Sam
On 11/10/05, Jason Y. Lee <jylee(a)cs.ucr.edu> wrote:
Can someone tell me why article transclusion is
allowed? Or why it is necessary?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_2005 has the same problems as
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_English_cricket_season_%2814-25_September…
The issue here is that many editors are running into articles that look like unnecessary
stubs which in fact are transclusions and are completely unaware of it. Why don't we
just disable such transclusions? I do not believe main space (article) transclusions are
necessary and they skew our article count. The number of cricket articles that I found
were a total of 508 articles that happen to be transcluded. I did not know that, nor did
the five other people who nominates similar articles for deletion.
--
Jason Y. Lee
AKA AllyUnion
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l