On 19/04/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/19/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
This is the best argument for not accepting articles which will receive no >significant attention, either from the public or from us. We have long passed the >point recent changes patrolling will catch all such vandalism.
But how to tell? And how to prevent such articles? While it could be done to an extent through a crude "any new article must have X links pointing to it" it cannot be done through deletion where we are close to capacity.
Deletion could help. Ignore any "keep and cleanup" which isn't "keep and cleanup, I'll do it"... We "vote to keep" an awful lot of articles that the community then shows no interest at all in maintaining.