On 1/27/07, Cheney Shill <halliburton_shill(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
Why not just start applying the policy? Set a time
limit.
No RS, delete. Maybe be nice and provide 1 last extended
deletion notice: "This article will be deleted in x days
if no RS are cited." That is, if it hasn't already been
uncited for several months.
Sure, if you really want to nuke 9/10ths of Wikipedia.
It seems like there has been an extended and unstated
policy to create essentially article shells simply to get
the article count up and increase Wikipedia's popularity.
Don't be cynical. I create stubs to increase Wikipedia's *usefulness*.
WP has a high enough count and popularity. Why not
start
actually focusing on content detail and enforcing the long
standing yet rarely applied policies?
How do you focus a group of some tens of thousands of self-interested
volunteers?
The alternative seems to be to continue to be the rear
end
of jokes about knowledge by consensus and hearsay like that
on the 1/24 Colbert Report until WP loses what trust it
has.
Wikipedia started as a joke and is rapidly gaining in prestige. What
makes you think its trend is the other direction?
Steve