At 11:13 PM 8/24/02 -0700, Lee Crocker wrote:
I would rather the policy was not changed. Most people can see that a short but important article could be expanded. I think the articles show up on the stub list anyway for folks to work on. Basically the change means that other peoples work is to be thrown away.
I think you misundertand. He isn't talking about deleting stubs. He's talking about deleting articles with NO content at all, so there's no "work" to throw away. And I'm entirely on Toby's side--no article at all is much better than an article with no content.
No, I don't misunderstand. The suggested policy change is to begin deleting short articles such as, for example [[Tucson, Arizona]] which unless it has been expanded is simply "A large city in southern [[Arizona]]. No one would care about deletion of an empty article; that can be done under the existing policy.
I should say I am one of the "guilty" parties here since I sometimes make such stubs, which at least one sysop has complained about.
My thought is that eventually someone will come along and work on say [[Tucson, Arizona]] and starting what is obviously a good topic is not a problem, but it no longer shows up in most wanted.
Fred Bauder