Karen AKA Kajikit wrote:
I just did a small experiment. I hit the random button
twenty times and
recorded the articles that came up. Judging by this random sample there
are three types of information presented in the wikipedia - 1)lists and
templates 2)pathetic stubs and 3)complete articles. Out of my twenty
According to this metric, Nupedia is a complete success and Wikipedia
is a two-thirds failure. I think you should add 200 articles that are
not yet written to each 20 that you found. A lot can be done to
improve the existing articles and going to random links can be a
useful way to find them, but there is also a great need to add
more articles, and in my personal opinion it is better to add a stub
than not.
15) Government of Nigeria - CIA factbook information
page. Essentially
Ah, that's why SpamAssassin caught your message. :-)
--
Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se)
tel +46-70-7891609
http://aronsson.se/ http://elektrosmog.nu/ http://susning.nu/