Jason Williams wrote:
If I start an article about something controversial and I stick to a bland NPOV stub, chances are it'll get ignored or only get minor corrections and additions. If I start with a blatantly biased stub which makes outrageous claims, you can almost guarantee one or more gangs of people will become very interested in expanding the article.
I don't agree. This is a tempting idea, but I don't think the empirical evidence supports it. What actually happens is that contentious beginnings delay the proper expanasion of an article because tempers are high.
--Jimbo