On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, The Cunctator wrote:
On 12/5/05, Daniel Mayer
<maveric149(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
For the record, I very strongly support this. This is due to the fact
that almost all, not just most, new pages created by anons on the
English Wikipedia are borderline to complete crap.
Do we have stats on that?
New, usable articles created by anons accounted for around 40% of all new
articles. This ignores speedied articles, etc which might inflate the
figure in favor of anon-creation.
Lots of them need wikification and start life as stubs; I wouldn't call
that "crap".
When I used to work new page patrol I found that most of all IP-created articles were
deleted or
listed for deletion/copyvio. I would call those crap. Most of the remaining ones had
significant
clean-up issues that needed to be fixed and/or were nearly useless stubs. I would call
those
borderline cases since they add little in comparison to the increased maintenance burden
on the
community. Most of total + most of remaining = almost all in my book
-- mav
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.