Aha, again demonstrating the obsession over the count. Why
was it
important to hit or not hit 100,000? Because of an offhand
remark made a
couple years ago about "we hope to reach 100,000 articles"?
Actually, milestone is important. While some seems meaningless including most active wikipedians, some statics are important, including the number of register users and the number of articles.
We want to know what we have achived, where we are heading for and better, we want to show off such.
Why? What's *wrong* with small articles?
Because some people short articles are useless. It is a wrong concept. Needless to say, the length of an article indicates nothing about the usefulness of the article.
I strongly believe the mere stub article of Japanese author written in English is much more precious than the list of songs with some stupid criteria.
Unless a better count system is proposed, I will
replace the comma check
with a greater-than-zero-size check within twelve hours.
And what about the people who get the digest after your
12 hour deadline? How
about the other people who only check or respond to
Wikipedia posts during
the week? Shouldn't they have a say in this?
Brion's proposal is fair. While there is still objection, greater-than-zero-size is more fair than comma counting. After change, we can still keep debate.
They had their say months ago when no one was able to
decide what to do.
Do you really think a new consensus is going to come in 24
hours? 48? A
week? A month? A year? I think you're sorely mistaken if
so. But,
please, feel free to prove me wrong.
Tell you what. I'll hold off until Wednesday night. Come up
with a
consensus on a better system by then, or comma-count shall
be replaced
with not-blank-count circa 07:00 UTC, 13 March. (11pm on
the 12th here
in PST.)
I am afraid we don't reach the consensus this time too. I suggest that we should at least change the counting system of ja wikipedia in the exact way you proposed. Leaving unfair system around is more injust than keeping debate hoping to reach the consensus.
Besides, it figures no one supports the current comma counting system, then why do we have to wait to overthrow it?
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org