[Wikipedia-l] Deletion of Articles with No Content

[Toby Bartels]

Fred Bauder wrote on [[Tucson, Arizona]] in part:

>My thought is that a short stub does no harm, expecially with a link to
>local attractions. And looking at the article, it seems there is some work,
>but still not a substantial article; in fact now it would seem hard to
>justify deleting it. Looking at history User O seems to have picked it up
>off recent changes and put in a few facts. I would say that the ball is
>rolling, if slowly.

[[User:0]] appears because of a bug in the conversion to Phase III;
it'd be interesting to figure out who that ''really'' was
(you used to be able to look this up at old.wikipedia.com)
and find out if the existence of the stub helped or hindered their work.
It is after the edits attributed to 0 that I think that the article
passes the barrier between useless and worthwhile.

>Granted I should take a look at the article "How to write a good stub," but
>it seemed to me at the time that a simple placeholder with a link to a
>resource that could be used to develop the article served well enough.

FYI, it's [[Wikipedia:The perfect stub article]],
originally (it seems) an essay by Larry Sanger.


-- Toby