On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Andrew Grayandrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
I have, interestingly, been noticing it moving in exactly the opposite
direction; articles with a couple of paragraphs of text, a reference
or two, an image or an infobox, being marked as "stubs". There's standards inflation at both ends of the rating system...
IMHO, this kind of thing is one of Wikipedia's greatest failings. We still can't even agree on a definition of things like "stub", and it seems to be in everyone's interest not to. People like stuff like that being subjective.
(FWIW, I think it's reasonable to have "stub" be relative to the expected content. Two paragraphs on a country would clearly be a "stub". Two paragraphs on an obscure medieval scribe might be the most comprehensive resource possible.)
Steve