On 3/31/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/31/07, The Cunctator <cunctator(a)gmail.com> wrote:
As a followup, doc's suggestion presupposes that unsourced == crap
most of the time, which is not true.
Doc said unsourced does not equal crap. I didn't see anything about "most
of
the time". Even if it's true some of the time, this idea would lead to
deleting non-crap. And doing that even once is one time too many. That's
what I believe to be the point, although doc glasgow's mileage may vary.
Doc said:
I like Jimbo's notion of a prod system that says
"this is crap, if it is
still crap in 7 days I will delete it"
I wonder if we could start this by simply saying
"Any article that
remains unsourced after being marked as such for 7 days is deleted". It
sounds draconian, but we now do it for images, why not articles? No, it
will not solve all out problems, but it would be a workable step towards
saying that it may be better to have no article for the moment than a
crap one.
This is a non sequitur unless you make the assumption that unsourced==crap.