[Wikipedia-l] [[WP:100K]] - who here writes well in English and another l...

[daniwo59 at aol.com]

I think that this is the precisely the point. At Wikipedia, we aim to be  the 
biggest and the best. Well, we already are the biggest--now let's be the  
best as well. 
 
There are so many ideas out there as to how we can do it. Let's share them. 
 
Some of the things that are happening (I realize this refers only to  en:wp)
 
1. "Requested articles" on the Recent changes page has been changed to  
"Stubs." Lets see some turnaround there. 
2. My contest, which I hope will be the first of many more. 
3. [[Polar exploration]], an article we did not have, which was written  
jointly by a group of people on IRC. It's still not up to par, but this is a  
really good example of collaborative writing. Get together with a few friends,  
pick an article, and fix it. 
4. Good articles, which are being improved. 
 
Other, easy steps--
1. Take a look at articles that did not quite make feature and fix  them.
2. Take a look at any of the lists that exist for vital articles, pick one  
and fix it. 
3. Look through the projects and portals and see what needs to be done. 
4. Take an EB:1911 article and make it a uniquely Wikipedia article. 
5. Look through the categories of articles needing citations and find the  
citations.
6. Pick a topic you know little about, go to the library and learn about  it, 
then write about what you learned. It can be very rewarding.
7. If you speak another language, translate. (It would be interesting to  see 
what the ratio of FAs per total articles is on other languages as compared  
to English).
 
For those who are intimidated by all the work this entails, remember--there  
are a lot of low hanging fruit out there. And it's much easier to do it than 
to  talk about it. And it's much more rewarding than to complain about this or 
that  (person or process).
 
Danny
Who would love to see [[Amethyst]] and [[Foreign policy]] vastly  improved.