On 8/23/06, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
I'd certainly put it in the top 100, even the top 10, although probably not the top 3. When a user looks up an article, the worst possible result would be to find a misleading or otherwise incorrect article. The second-worst result would be to find no article. The third-worst would be to find a somewhat shoddy but not misleading or wrong article. So I'd rank "we don't cover that at all" pretty high on the list of ways our coverage of a topic could suck.
I agree. I personally feel that a one sentence description with a URL link to a page that covers the subject thoroughly is a *very* valuable addition to our encyclopaedia. I wonder if others agree?
Steve