[Wikipedia-l] Deletion of Articles with No Content

[Ray Saintonge]

Fred Bauder wrote:

>At 10:08 PM 8/25/02 -0400, Vicki Rosenzweig wrote:
>
>>Actually, I'd favor deleting some of Fredbauder's stubs, since I
>>think entries like "a large city in southern Arizona" as the entire article
>>reduce the chance of anyone seeing the gap and writing a good article
>>on the subject.
>>
>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.
>
My compliments to User 0 who did his work on June 16.  Now only 
Flagstaff is simply a city in northern Arizona and nothing more.  The 
fact that I'm enterring Flagstaff into the debate may very well lead to 
something being written about it, but that's only one article.  How many 
more useless stubs are there which appear in links as written?  They 
just promote a false sense of confidence that they do have content.  I 
agree with Vicki on this.  No article is often better than a useless 
article.

Eclecticology