The official vote results were to count pages in article space that are:
- not completely empty (size greater than 0 bytes)
- contain at least one link (search for "[[" should
do)
Is it me or isn't it true that all pages that contain at least one link would not be completely empty? Thus, saying both of the above statements is a bit redundant. :)
Chuck
===== Learn Esperanto! - http://www.lernu.net/ Enciklopedio: http://eo.wikipedia.org/
___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
On Sun, 2003-03-30 at 04:27, Chuck Smith wrote:
The official vote results were to count pages in article space that are:
- not completely empty (size greater than 0 bytes)
- contain at least one link (search for "[[" should
do)
Is it me or isn't it true that all pages that contain at least one link would not be completely empty? Thus, saying both of the above statements is a bit redundant. :)
This is to distinguish from other proposals that require a page to reach X arbitrary number of bytes before getting any respect. (Sizeism, probably illegal under the Universal Declaration of Webpage Rights. ;)
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Chuck Smith wrote:
The official vote results were to count pages in article space that are:
- not completely empty (size greater than 0 bytes)
- contain at least one link (search for "[[" should
do)
Is it me or isn't it true that all pages that contain at least one link would not be completely empty? Thus, saying both of the above statements is a bit redundant. :)
The problem with that POV is that it's too logical. :-)
Ec
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org