At 10:08 PM 8/25/02 -0400, Vicki Rosenzweig wrote:
Actually, I'd favor deleting some of Fredbauder's stubs, since I think entries like "a large city in southern Arizona" as the entire article reduce the chance of anyone seeing the gap and writing a good article on the subject.
So no misunderstanding at all. But the question is not whether Tucson, Arizona should be removed, but what serves to eventually produce a nice article. I think a placeholder with a web link to information that can be used to develop an article serves well enough. Vicki seems to think having nothing would work better. I don't think there is an question eventually we would like an article on Tucson. I wrote the stub after I found links to [[Tucson]], [[Tucson,Arizona]], and [[Tucson, Arizona]].
My thought is that a short stub does no harm, expecially with a link to local attractions. And looking at the article, it seems there is some work, but still not a substantial article; in fact now it would seem hard to justify deleting it. Looking at history User O seems to have picked it up off recent changes and put in a few facts. I would say that the ball is rolling, if slowly.
Granted I should take a look at the article "How to write a good stub," but it seemed to me at the time that a simple placeholder with a link to a resource that could be used to develop the article served well enough.
Fred Bauder