[WikiEN-l] Thousands of *awful* articles on websites

[Oldak Quill]

On 03/01/07, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> This seems a waste.  Just because something hasn't been written about
> by the mainstream press doesn't make it worthless to people reading
> Wikipedia.
>
> http://internet.wikia.com/index.php?title=User:Angela&oldid=1943 shows
> 17 examples of pages you deleted today which I've rescued for the
> Internet Wiki, but it's a shame so many hundreds like those are being
> deleted every day rather than moved to a more suitable wiki or
> rewritten to make them suitable for Wikipedia.

I quite agree. Once an article is deleted it is no longer available to
anyone who doesn't have admin status. There doesn't seem to be a
co-ordinated effort among admins to sift through deleted articles to
find useful information and so this information is effectively lost.

Wikipedia's primary goal is to create free encyclopaedic content. IMO,
it is always more useful for us to rewrite an article than to delete
it wherever possible. If it is the case that the content is not
suitable for Wikipedia (which, as long as it has a certain level of
verifiability, is rare) then we should aim to put the content
somewhere else so that it remains usable and the free content movement
as-a-whole is benefited.

-- 
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)