As you say, editors can be encouraged to write redlinks or stubs when other editors do not delete them as a matter of principle, from an opinion that there should be only full articles, to be written off line and then added.
A small number of determined individuals can hold out against consensus on policy indefinitely if they are not too conspicuous. (I do not mean an organized group, just individuals who separately have come to think this way).
The remedy is to make them conspicuous, and see which view is more generally accepted. It takes a corresponding number of equally determined individuals to accomplish this.
B. How can editors be encouraged at writing something which is actually a redlink or stub? I have seen a user removing the redlink and maybe even complaining because there was one.Massimo _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l