[WikiEN-l] Suggestion for standards for contributions to articles

[Steve Bennett]

Rob Church wrote:
>"Must define topic far enough to allow for further expansion, without
>containing libel or obvious bias or overemphasis of opinion. Must not
>infringe copyrights."

That's fine - "POV" was my shorthand.

>> "Start" class:
>> Information must in all likelihood have been published somewhere, even
>> if a source is not immediately known.

>At least one reference would be nice, even if it's a generic source
>for the whole stub or whatever.

The consequences of making that a requirement is that any "start" article
without a source would have to be automatically deemed to be a "stub". You
see what I'm getting at?

>On the whole, I like the idea of some sort of rating system, but I do
>fear it would add to the administrivia. Question is, can we afford not
>to review our work? Answer: no.

I think rating systems are inevitable and there several different mechanisms
seem to be on the horizon. I'm suggesting that we use them to *enforce*
quality standards. "Your contribution is not acceptable for an article of
quality FA-class - it absolutely definitely needs a footnote."

Steve (who just changed email addresses, in case anyone is confused)