On 07/09/05, charles matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
Trying to think laterally for the moment. If articles were rated on a scale of 1 to 100 for excellence, the lower rungs of the ladder would correspond to poor articles, of various types: stubby, badly written, failing when judged by policy (NPOV, NOR, CYS), non-encyclopedic. This could be the basis of an automated clean-up/deletion mechanism also, but would need perhaps one other ingredient (to make a kind of 2-d plot). What should that be?
Quality of form vs. quality of content?
The one is ranging from an unwikified orphan stub to a polished, linked, well-referenced 5,000 word article article; the other deals with comprehensiveness, NPOV, accuracy, &c.