I completely agree with Mav. The emphasis now should be on improving the quality, not the quantity, despite the views of some that every thing is valuable.
I would also discourage stubs, which are lazy, and expect others to do the hard work
Jim
JFrost8401@aol.com wrote
<snip>
I would also discourage stubs, which are lazy, and expect others to do the
hard work
Short articles in general, and some stubs in particular, are suitable ways to develop some parts of WP; clearly depends on the topic area.
Charles
On Saturday 13 December 2003 02:32, JFrost8401@aol.com wrote:
I completely agree with Mav. The emphasis now should be on improving the quality, not the quantity, despite the views of some that every thing is valuable.
This is a common fallacy that people have about free software (or in this case free content) development: One can't tell developers what to work on, unless one pays them. Sure, one can try and encourage them to work on things, but in the end they decide what to work on.
I'm not decided between mav and erik's approaches, but how exactly is having "1.0" (or "nupedia", whatever) further removed from wikipedia (ie. on a different domain) going to help in improving the quality of the content?
Best, Sascha Noyes
