On 1/12/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/12/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
It doesn't have to be a "proper stub" to be "better than nothing". A simple one-liner stating whatever it is you know that verifies that the topic is reasonably worthy should be enough. If the article is "worse than nothing", then surely it's worse than a one-line stub, so you've improved the article and punted the problem to those people who like to delete things.
A one liner turns all the links blue. Fewer people will then notice that it needs some serious expansion.
-- geni
And you think this is a big enough problem that it renders the stubs to be worth less than nothing? If so, I disagree. Logged in users can mark links containing less than X characters specially anyway (which is *better* information than just red vs. blue), and users that aren't logged in couldn't even edit the article if it was deleted completely.