--- Delirium delirium@rufus.d2g.com wrote:
I'm not that sure about that. I've actually run across non-articles on Wikipedia before while doing research, which was rather annoying (for example, a dump of the full text of some treaty masquerading as an "article" on that treaty).
So put them on Cleanup! Leave "VFD" as your sole POV opinion of the "issue" -- but report the actual *issue on Cleanup.
If we didn't delete these sorts of things, there'd be a lot more of that, which I think would hurt Wikipedia's credibility ("250,000 articles, but only 190,000 real ones" isn't a good tagline).
"If we dont kill them they are going to kill us... Aarrggh!" You dont belong to any... cults... do you Mark? I mean besides this one. :)
When someone finds a Wikipedia article, it should be at least a decent stub, in order to keep our reputation for quality at least moderately high.
This can be better emphasized with consistent correction -- by example -- wikifying, making a comment, etc. Not slapping the hand of the people that make a wiki work. Dont be wikelitist now....
"Oh, Wikipedia doesn't have an article on this subject" is a lot better than "Wikipedia has an article on this subject, let me click on that... oh, never mind, it's not a real article, just a 155KB text dump."
All your complaints are about newbies and their newbieism -- its better to deal with them with some respect than simply flushing what they do down the drain. I remember when "Stevertigo" was up for deletion -- someone ( I forget) made it a simple redirect -- I remember feeling sort of.. picked on just for that... and maybe if people werent reasonable about it (Rick...) then that would have soured my opinion of the community.
I do agree that the whole process should be less antagonistic, but I'm not too sure what to do about that.
Try "Cleaning up" articles instead of automatically "Delete" ing them.
~S~
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com