On 1/12/06, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 1/12/06, Anthony DiPierro
<wikilegal(a)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.