James Hare wrote:
The problem is we've let it slide for so long we now have tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of articles that are acceptable by basic editorial standards. If only fixing the existing problems (while more and more are introduced) was feasible.
But if they're subjects we'll want articles about eventually anyway, deleting an unsourced version simply punts the work even farther into the future.
And why do we have to get all of Wikipedia's articles in tip-top shape at once? As long as there's a steady stream of articles improving their way ever closer to the top, I don't see the problem with a steady stream of sub-par articles continuing to be created at the same time. If we want to publish a DVD version we'd need to pick articles out for it selectively regardless.