Many of the roughly 1.5 million Wikipedia articles that are near start or
stub quality are at that level for good reason: Lack of public interest.
However, if one were to start a new encyclopedia with the aim of improving
them and could find a sizable number of people whose tolerance for
incredibly boring topics was quite high, i'm sure Wikipedia would gladly
accept the changes back. Its just that no one would read them.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
* has not been
growing exponentially; instead, growth is a "straight
line";
It's worse than that. Not only is growth in article numbers linear,
median word count per article is decreasing fairly rapidly so it would
seem they're just writing stubs. I would advise you to try and avoid
that - the only way you are going to attract readers away from
Wikipedia is if your articles are significantly better quality, you
will never match us for quantity (well, not for a few years, anyway,
and as I said before it's the first 18 months that matters).
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l