On 5/3/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Why do we delete "horrible" articles if they don't shape up "really soon"? What's soon? Why don't we want horrible articles hanging around for 2 years? Are "horrible" articles better or worse than stubs on the same topics?
They can often be worse
By the way, [[LUG]]s generally aren't attached to streets, they're usually attached to entire metropolitan areas. In fact, I suspect a well-written article on the [[Suncoast Linux Users Group]], for example, would survive a VFD vote today.
I'm sad to hear that well-writtenness is a criteria in AfDs. If it's not well-written someone should just fix it.
Someone?
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Cleanup_by_month
15000 articles.
Looks like anyone who might be that someone has enough work on their hands already. -- geni