On 10/7/07, John Lee johnleemk@gmail.com wrote:
There are arguments for maintaining the present system - it makes it clear that we're aware the article is not up to mark, and may let people know that they too can edit the article.
Exactly. The templates can help convert readers into editors.
I started editing in 2005 because I saw a {{wikify}} tag (or something similar). I thought, "I can do that", and did.
They also help remind all the readers that Wikipedia is a work-in-progress. It may even be the first clue they get as to how Wikipedia works - I'd guess most of our readers are only familiar with the site as "that place that always appears near the top of google's results". Anything that increases the depth of their understanding of the project, warts and all, is a good thing.
As for the look of them, see a comparison screenshot of before/after: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wikipedia_-_comparison_of_template_standa... I personally dislike the cartoonish icons and their large size. However, I think the intuitive colouring and consistent design of the boxes is a vast improvement.
Quiddity