[WikiEN-l] You're magically made an admin. What do you do?

[Jeff Raymond]

Todd Allen wrote:

> From what I saw, most of those the webcomic articles -were- crud, and
> that includes many that got kept. Most of them were trivially, if at
> all, mentioned in any secondary reliable sources, they were full of
> original research (effectively unfixable, due to that lack of
> secondary sources), and the main arguments for keeping were ILIKEIT
> from fans. If some webcomic is genuinely going to be of long-lasting,
> truly encyclopedic value, it'll get covered by secondary sources, and
> we can have an article. Until then, we don't need articles about
> passing web fads.

Of course, never mind that our reliable source guideline is irresponsibly
tipped toward dead-tree media, and because of this, it allows for
arguments such as the one you've presented.  As a result, we lose out on a
significant number of worthwhile articles, look like idiots when we speedy
an important webcomic, and lose a substantial amount of possible editors
who could a) improve our coverage in that topic area, and b) do things in
other subjects to improve things.

But sure, we can have it this way, too.

-Jeff


-- 
If you can read this, I'm not at home.