On 29 November 2010 17:33, Charles Matthews <charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Points arise from that, clearly. But I'm hearing quite a lot recently > from the "glass half empty" people. You know, ten short stubs are > created, and a year later five are still stubby, five are much improved. > Are we glad to have five new substantial articles, or embarrassed to > have persistent five stubs? So has this made things proportionately > better or worse? Discuss. Wikipedia is a work in progress, despite a certain proportion of editors always having been uncomfortable with this being apparent, and a stub is frequently more informative to the reader than nothing. - d. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
