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

[Charles Matthews]

On 29/11/2010 17:59, MuZemike wrote:
> Short answer: I think we have made a step in the right direction by
> getting five decently-expanded articles as a result of ten stubs.
That's my answer also.
> However, what about the ones that cannot be expanded? That leads to my
> "long answer" below:
>
> It depends on the expandability of the remaining stubs. Are they able to
> be expanded via reliable sources to a decently-sized encyclopedia
> article?
Well, let's assume for the purposes of this argument that in principle 
they can be. If not, they can be deleted, preferably via PROD in case 
some more sources come along.
> One thing I have observed about the creation of stubs (besides
> from newcomers, which normally they are "hit or miss" on expandability
> due to their relative lack of experience with WP or with wikis in
> general), this is assumption or even prediction that 'they can possibly
> be expanded' or 'they might be some sources out there'.
>
> I would generally find such a premise behind stub-creation as
> unsatisfactory content creation/expansion; however, I come from a belief
> that Wikipedia's focus should be on the amount of raw, sourced content
> as opposed to the raw number of articles that can be created. To put in
> a more concrete way, any given Wikipedia article is not precisely '1
> unit of knowledge' (Google Knol can sue me later for ripping off their
> terminology); that is, our article on "Abraham Lincoln" contains much
> more verifiable information than, say, "Venezuela at the 2010 Pan
> American Games".
I find something to agree with here, given that one of my hobbyhorses is 
that WP is hypertext, however much the current recognition is of authors 
of *articles*. The presentation of facts is less significant in the end 
than their presence on the site, in a place where they can be found.

I would, however, still welcome an answer to the original question. 
There is a certain distribution of sizes of articles, and a certain more 
notional distribution of "completeness percentages"  - the article on 
Abe is going to be how complete compared with a 600 page biography?

Charles