[WikiEN-l] Notability etymology and history (was Re: WP:EPISODE)

[Anthony]

On Jan 1, 2008 9:49 PM, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 02/01/2008, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:
> > On Jan 1, 2008 8:49 PM, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 02/01/2008, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:
> > > > A sudden influx of 500 million stubs would also *require* far more
> > > > volunteer effort than we have available.  No one has suggested
> > > > allowing bots to create such stubs, after all.
> > > >
> > >
> > > With semi automated tools it could be done in about 5 years probably less.
> > >
> > I'm sure a policy on semi-automated article generation could be
> > devised within those 5 years.  How many people do you think could
> > create this many articles in 5 years, anyway?  I certainly don't see
> > it happening with only one person, if that's what you were getting at.
> >
>
> Depends how semi automated the tool actually is. I understand that
> there are social networking sites with very large numbers of pages.
>
Well, you're the one making the assertion that allowing articles on
dead people based on reliable sources would overwhelm Wikipedia with
500 million semi-automated entries, so I'll let you provide the
explanation for how that's going to happen.  Personally, I don't see
it happening in just 5 years, at least not without some major
technology breakthrough.

> > And where can I download this database of 500 million entries?  It's
> > kind of interesting that it's out there in the first place.
> >
>
> I think it's called myspace.
>
Myspace is not a reliable source.

> I'm not aware of any online database of 500 million dead people. That
> was an estimate based on the th4e likely size of various countries
> military records and the various censuses that are becoming available.
>
But then you went on to talk about "semi-automated article
generation", which would require those records to be readily available
in an electronic form.  If you're saying that people are going to go
to their local archives and look up this information to copy it in,
we're either talking about tens of thousands of participants in this
venture or about much more than 5 years.

> > > > Incidentally, running 500 million stubs through AFD would also require
> > > > far more volunteer effort than is available.
> > >
> > > So? there are two other far more effective deletion methods available.
> > >
> > To delete an article on a dead person based on a reliable source?  Is
> > there a CSD criterion for that?
>
> A7 but bot assisted mass prodding and deletion would probably get a
> higher through put.
>
Mass prodding can be done regardless of notability policy, though.  As
for A7, you've already pointed out one flaw with relying on assertions
of "importance".

Of course, in the case of 500 million semi-automated stub creations,
IAR should be enough to stop that.