On 10/24/05, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/24/05, Anthony DiPierro wikispam@inbox.org wrote:
I really don't know where you get these ideas from. How are low-quality articles "tolerated"?
by not being deleted
So deletion is the only solution to something that is low quality? I would think making it higher quality would also suffice.
Who would rather have more articles than better
articles?
It is the logical endpoint of the inclusionist position
Not at all. I'm an inclusionist, and I'd much rather have better articles than more articles. However 1) I think deletion is a waste of time that could be better spent improving articles, and 2) I don't think the two are mutually exclusive, I think you can have more articles *and* better articles. So please, if you're not an inclusionist, don't speak for us. That's called a strawman argument.
Who even thinks there is a choice between more articles and better
articles?
Those of us that can do the maths. The relivant caculation is:
Ew=A*meanAE
AQ=AE
So
MeanAQ=Ew/A
Where
A= no of articles E=effort w=wikipedia Q=quality.
I don't remember ever learning that one in my math class.
--
geni