On 3/31/07, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
doc wrote:
The fact is, with regard to biographies at very least, we are now tfar too high profile for the eventualism that says we must keep awful, pov, unsourced stuff, because in theory we could fix most of it. That's now simply unacceptable.
And there is a different form of eventualism which works quite well. It's ok to delete a horribly crappy unsourced article, OR ANY PART of such an article, because EVENTUALLY we will be able to add more information, with sources, in the right way.
For a small wikipedia it can be ok to say: we are desperate for volunteers, we are desperate for growth, and so it is best to put up with a fair amount of unsourced stuff that is mostly right, just to build up a base of work for the future.
In en.wikipedia, we have a base of work for the future. And therefore it is natural and proper that we should over time get more and more and more serious about quality.
Any proper measure of quality for Wikipedia also includes comprehensiveness.