[Wikipedia-l] Re: 90000 articles

[Ray Saintonge]

Digital Addictions Software wrote:

>>I think we should implement the greatly-pared-down counting scheme we were
>>discussing on the list earlier.  We don't have 90K articles.  We have
>>about 50K articles and about 40K geographical entries automatically
>>created from a database.
>>
>I guess I just take these things personally, but many of those geographical
>entries are more articles than those other 50k non-geographical articles.  They
>have more information.  People are just uncomfortable because they don't like
>the data because it does not interest them or because it was created in a mass
>quantity.  No one complains when others write articles that have two or three
>sentences.  In fact no one complained when I made these articles on a small
>scale, in fact I got a number of people who told me it was a great thing.  I
>think we need to stop separating the geographics articles from everything else.
> They are all articles and should be treated as such.  If you don't like them,
>add to them.
>
As one who feels that your additions were appropriate, I fully support 
their inclusion as proper articles.

There's a question of anti-robotism involved.  They like having robots 
do their drudge work, but they wouldn't want their computer to marry one.
Eclecticology