Ah, fair point. I hadn't thought of that one. Apply an opt-out policy to said stubs, in which case (but not to other BLPs)?
CM
Odi profanum vulgus et arceo.
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 17:24:10 +0100 From: james.farrar@gmail.com To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] An example of a bad biography
2008/4/29 Christiano Moreschi moreschiwikiman@hotmail.co.uk:
Not really. If an article's always going to be a stub, there's no point having it all.
I disagree that a BLP is ever "always" going to be a stub - in this specific case, many union leaders go into politics; at the least, he may turn into another [[Bob Crow]].
Our inability to predict the future extends to other categories of article, too. For instance, before 1st August 2007, many might have said that [[I-35W Mississippi River bridge]] was "always going to be a stub". Having it existing as a stub probably helped editors build it up when it became somewhat more notable than it previously had been.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_________________________________________________________________ Play the Andrex Hello Softie Game & win great prizes http://www.thehellosoftiegame.co.uk