Jimmy Wales wrote:
I strongly
disagree with that; eventually producing a good encyclopedia
ought to take precedence over immediately gaining good PR (or avoiding
bad PR).
Eventually producing a good encyclopedia is _exactly_ what I'm talking
about. That's why it's better to delete crap than keep it. Having tons
and tons of junk articles does not help us create a good quality
encyclopedia; it encourages more of the same.
It rather depends on what you mean by 'crap' and 'junk articles', I
think. Some clarification of this would be appreciated.
Personally I think that, for any topic, a one-line stub is better than
no article at all (and this is certainly the position adopted by
[[Wikipedia:Replies to common objections]], a 'party line' I have been
toeing at info-en@ correspondents for some time).
Cheers,
N.
--
Nicholas Boalch
School of Modern Languages & Cultures Tel: +44 (0) 191 334 3456
University of Durham Fax: +44 (0) 191 334 3421
New Elvet, Durham DH1 3JT, UK WWW:
http://nick.frejol.org/