[WikiEN-l] Writing for the Pedia

[John Lee]

On 8/29/07, michael west <michawest at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 29/08/2007, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 29/08/2007, charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com
> > <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >
> > > There is still such a vast collection of information in a typical
> > academic library that we don't cover. I can't imagine ever running out
> of
> > things to write.
> >
> >
> > Presumably by "a lack of low-hanging fruit" is meant "a lack of fruit
> > that actively jumps into one's mouth."
> >
> > The media, particularly the geek web media sphere, does inform new
> > articles - anything covered in Slashdot is going to be well-covered in
> > Wikipedia in short order. So for those complaining that we're out of
> > low-hanging fruit, we need other media feeds. Or something.
> >
> >
> > - d.
>
>
> As for REDIRECTS - what is the current policy? take two of my google
> searches yesterday as examples*  j s m ward  *
>
> http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=jsm+ward&spell=1
> -
> the first wikipedia page is miles away John Sebastian Marlow Ward
>
> ;and kryolite (my alternative? spelling of Cryolite)
> http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=kryolite&meta= If one
> hears
> a word on television or radio its not always obvious how it is spelled
>
> i would never suggest that every permutation of an articles name should be
> a
> redirect, but i  wouldn't consider writing one now that everybody has TW.
> I
> just wouldn't be bothered with arguing over a PROD on a redirect.


Good point. I've stumbled on many useful redirects deleted for no apparent
reason other than someone thought they were a waste of server resources,
which is really ridiculous IMO. (I believe a developer once pointed out that
an edit which skips a redirect causes more strain on the server than people
following that redirect.)

Johnleemk