Viajero wrote:
It is fine in principal to be against deleting articles
but that implies
ACTION in concrete terms, but since we are a collection of volunteers,
this doesn't always follow. While I have nothing against incomplete
articles, of which there are obviously many in WP, I am strongly against
have genuinely *bad* articles -- such as the Palestinian viewpoints
article -- in the encyclopedia. They should be fixed immediately or
deleted -- one or the other.
Nicely put! As a group of volunteers we can't expect that somebody will want
to fix a bad article. So giving a bad article exposure for one last chance to
at least become a stub is a good thing.
Furthermore, the mere existence of bad articles encourages more bad articles
to be added. Incomplete is one thing - that is relatively easy to fix - but
bad is another and if often much more difficult to fix.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)