On 5/6/06, Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com> wrote:
This approach I don't agree with. Everytime we
cite the fact that
Wikipedia has 1,000,000 articles, we ascribe value to each of those
articles. Every time we allow crud that we would be ashamed to speak
of to remain in the article, we diminish the value of those articles.
For exactly the same reason I think it is very poor for us to have
900,000 (or more?) inactive user accounts. They don't harm us directly
- but they do vastly misrepresent the actual state of the project.
Every free internet forum has the same issue.
Speaking for myself, the existence of Pokemon is not
directly a
problem. But Wikipedia would certainly be better off if somehow all
the effort that was expended on Pokemon articles was somehow invested
in other ways.
Steve
Pokemon are massive. How many pokemon can you name? How many uk canals
(my area) can you name?
--
geni