On 1/27/07, Cheney Shill halliburton_shill@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