[WikiEN-l] What proportion of articles are stubs?

[Carcharoth]

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 5:46 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29 November 2010 17:33, Charles Matthews
> <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> Points arise from that, clearly. But I'm hearing quite a lot recently
>> from the "glass half empty" people. You know, ten short stubs are
>> created, and a year later five are still stubby, five are much improved.
>> Are we glad to have five new substantial articles, or embarrassed to
>> have persistent five stubs? So has this made things proportionately
>> better or worse? Discuss.
>
>
> Wikipedia is a work in progress, despite a certain proportion of
> editors always having been uncomfortable with this being apparent, and
> a stub is frequently more informative to the reader than nothing.

But some data, like Charles is asking for, is not an unreasonable request.

Carcharoth