Mark Richards wrote:
Yes, rapid fire drive-by-deletion is out of control.
Just because rapid-fire nonsense substub creation is out of control. And way to many of real speedy-deletions survive the new page patrol, and only get noticed by sheer lucky later - e.g. if an Image:Example.jpg is used, or someone checks the short articles or orphaned articles later on. Of course there is some collateral damage sometimes - yesterday I rescued to stubs of [[Elder Edda]] poems which were already marked by {{delete}} - but as they were just one-liners the loss wouldn't have been that big.
As far as I'm concerned, Wikipedia still needs stubs to grow, precisely in areas where it is currently weak.
That's the old discussion if a stub makes a topic grow better than a non-existiting article, and if a stub look better/worse than a non-existing article. IMHO everything below three sentences isn't worth it, but I know that's currently not the consensus.
Bye, [[User:Ahoerstemeier]]