Jason Williams wrote:
If I start an article about something controversial
and I stick to
a bland NPOV stub, chances are it'll get ignored or only get minor
corrections and additions. If I start with a blatantly biased stub
which makes outrageous claims, you can almost guarantee one or more
gangs of people will become very interested in expanding the article.
I don't agree. This is a tempting idea, but I don't think the
empirical evidence supports it. What actually happens is that
contentious beginnings delay the proper expanasion of an article
because tempers are high.
--Jimbo