[WikiEN-l] And now, for something completely different

[David Gerard]

Carnildo wrote:

>Not surprisingly, the average coverage of subjects is fairly poor.  64% of
>articles were rated "low" or "stub", indicating they did not have even a
>basic chronology of the subject's life, and 29% were rated "medium",
>indicating a basic chronology but nothing more.  6% were rated "good", with
>a relatively complete chronology, and one article was approaching "featured"
>quality.  While doing the survey, one of the biographies was deleted for
>lack of notability, one as being unverifiable, and two were listed as
>copyvios.


Unfortunately, I've found that a lot of people don't get a good bio in
Wikipedia until they die and there are nicely-researched obituaries to
use as sources.


- d.