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