[WikiEN-l] What proportion of articles are stubs?

[Charles Matthews]

On 30/11/2010 01:46, MuZemike wrote:
> And that's another problem that I am seeing more and more of. Call it
> simply being lazy, unable to write actual prose, or a combination
> thereof; but there are so many articles that get created that have only
> one (likely unsourced) sentence, a pretty infobox, a pretty navbox, a
> table, categories, and what other (stub) templates there.
>
> I would claim that infoboxes are the biggest culprit in that they are
> being substituted for "actual prose". If an article creator only has one
> actual sentence of prose to put forth, that is not much, and I would
> claim sheer laziness in the article creator's part.
>
> Especially with these stubs on locations, when you cannot provide any
> more information on a location than what would normally be presented in
> an organized list or even an atlas or map, one wonders if writing about
> a location in the form of an encyclopedia article is the most efficient
> way to go.
>
Yes, this brings us back to why I asked the question. We all have tastes 
in the matter, but what is on the site does reflect largely what content 
policy says. A verifiable short stub is not something to exclude, and 
Wikipedia (at least the English sort, and I think others too) has been 
founded on stubs that are later expanded.

Is there a changing profile over time? Should there be? It seems clear 
that the concentration on GA and FA is not going to help upgrade most 
stubs; and there is no kudos to be had by serially improving stubs, 
except within the context of a WikiProject with a curatorial attitude.

Gazetteer-like entries actually are not harmful. Infobox-only entries 
could end up forming a kind of penumbra round articles in prose: that 
could be more harmful.

I see a number of directions in which people are working to make 
coverage more complete, in which the production of stubs is almost 
inevitable. Looked at in terms of people's tastes, there is no real 
debate to be had beyond "I'd prefer you didn't". The first decade will 
be up in a few weeks, and it could be time to take stock.

Charles