"Matt Brown" wrote
IOW, if the overall quality of the encyclopedia increases, it's likely that FAC will become even pickier so that their criteria only pass the same proportion.
Isn't it more or less tuned so we get an average of one new Featured Article per day? Any less could be a problem, any more and people start adding bells and whistles to the criteria.
But then, we are talking about recognition. I suspect the mathematicians have pretty much given up on FAs, because (a) it is hard to justify the effort, compared with other things you could do in the time, and (b) other kinds of recognition matter to them.
Charles
----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
On 14 Sep 2006, at 08:31, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
"Matt Brown" wrote
IOW, if the overall quality of the encyclopedia increases, it's likely that FAC will become even pickier so that their criteria only pass the same proportion.
Isn't it more or less tuned so we get an average of one new Featured Article per day? Any less could be a problem, any more and people start adding bells and whistles to the criteria.
But then, we are talking about recognition. I suspect the mathematicians have pretty much given up on FAs, because (a) it is hard to justify the effort, compared with other things you could do in the time, and (b) other kinds of recognition matter to them.
Even so, we're gradually moving [[Mathematics]] to FA status.
On 14/09/06, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
But then, we are talking about recognition. I suspect the mathematicians have pretty much given up on FAs, because (a) it is hard to justify the effort, compared with other things you could do in the time, and (b) other kinds of recognition matter to them.
This may be worth noting on [[WT:FAC]].
- d.