Daniel Mayer wrote:
RickK wrote:
[[User:Kwantus]] is creating pages at a fast rate, most of them consisting of little more than data with no complete sentences. When I asked him if he could please write complete sentences, his reply (my first question on his talk page, his reply to it):
Re: John Jay McCloy. Any chance you can write complete sentences and correctly wikify what you include in the article? This article is currently really worthless. RickK 07:48, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC) Simple answer, no. I research, not write. Don't like it, then fix it, erase it, or ban me.
This seems like a perfectly reasonable division of labour to me. We have plenty of people who enjoy copyediting. I've now edited a few of his entries. In fact, there were only a few; 'at a fast rate' was a bit of an exaggeration.
Wikipedia is not a dumping ground for data. This is a well-established concept.
Did you look at the pages? They're not dictionary entries, they're made up of exactly the sort of information we want in encyclopedia articles. They're just not written up as continuous prose.
His behavior is also a violation of our etiquette policy. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette
Again, it isn't. He has not been rude to anyone, and he has not made any personal attacks. He's been very blunt, but we have an awful lot of contributors like that.
Follow him around for a while and when you get tired then list his junk pages on VfD.
We should not be deleting useful articles. If you're not interested in copyediting them, leave them for someone else to do. It doesn't matter if it takes a while for someone to get round to it. As they are, the articles are much more useful to our readers than a blank page would be.
-M-