"Andrew Gray" <shimgray(a)gmail.com> writes:
On 31/03/07, doc <doc.wikipedia(a)ntlworld.com>
wrote:
> I like Jimbo's notion of a prod system that says "this is crap,
if it
is
> still crap in 7 days I will delete it"
>
> I wonder if we could start this by simply saying "Any article
that
> remains unsourced after being marked as such for 7
days is
deleted". It
> sounds draconian, but we now do it for images, why
not
articles? No, it
> will not solve all out problems, but it would be a
workable
step towards
> saying that it may be better to have no article
for the moment
than a
crap one.
I did this some time ago for the contents of
[[Category:Rapists]] and
its ilk; unsourced claims were removed, and in the few
cases
where
they constituted the entirety of the article, were
replaced with
a
prod tag saying "no verifiable assertion of
significance is left
after
defamatory unsourced assertions removed, so a
contentless
article", or
words to that effect.
I suspect I had about a one in three success rate and a lot of
people
screaming about disruption... and sourcing their
articles.
--
- Andrew Gray
I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from that - people are
willing to *briefly* do heroic feats of editing, if they feel it
will satisfy one maniac and just get him off their and their
articles' collective backs, but to expect them to do it again and
again as a routine matter of course is quite a stretch.
--
Gwern
Inquiring minds want to know.