Stubs aren't bad. They may be about a topic which doesn't have many information.
-- Alvaro
On 14-01-2009, at 12:57, Ken Arromdee arromdee@rahul.net wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 wjhonson@aol.com wrote:
I am sorry I still do not get it.
- Is your proposal going to completely hide "unfinished" articles
from the public? If so who will be able to see them? Admins? Users?>>
To hide those articles which are unfinished, or which the community has decided are unfinished. So the AfD process becomes simply the "Hide It process" much less contentious.
You didn't answer the question about who gets to see them.
Given most possible answers to this question, it'll just end up being the same as AFD. After all, right now an admin can see a deleted article.
<<3) Isn't your proposal hiding all stubs as well as some other articles? After all no stub by very definition is ready for "public consumption".>>
No. It has nothing to do with stubs or non-stubs. Stubs are published today, and they would be published tomorrow. The only thing this does is provide a way for AfD to turn into something with less conflict.
Well, is it about hiding articles ready for public consumption, or isn't it? If it is, stubs get hidden. If it's not, you shouldn't say it is.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l