[WikiEN-l] Rating the English wikipedia

[Charles Matthews]

On 14/02/2011 03:35, Ian Woollard wrote:
> I think you can't take the simple percentages of articles, a lot of
> the most important and well visited articles are pretty well sorted,
> whereas the stubs are mostly articles few people go to.
While this discussion is worth having, I wish to record a view, now long 
held, by means of a metaphor. Wikipedia is an omelette, not scrambled 
eggs. Because of the intrinsic use of of hypertext, taking WP to be (in 
the large) a collection of articles is always a distortion. If the "few 
people" who go to a stub are just those who would refer to a 
corresponding footnote in a book, the system as a whole is functioning 
as it should.

Charles