2009/2/16 Phil Nash <pn007a2...@blueyonder.co.uk>: > I think that this was bound to happen; any venture based on describing the > known universe has an inherent limit in any case, and it seems obvious that > once you've reached some level of coverage, what happens then is more > determined by the pace of real life events. However, like software, it's > arguable that an encyclopedia is never really finished. Good Articles may be > good, and Featured Articles better, but something will always come along to > require additions. As for relaxing notability guidelines, I think we very > largely get it about right at present, and opening a can of worms does not > commend itself to me as a policy.
If we get to the point where virtually no new articles are being created (beyond current events) and a very large proportion of the existing articles are at least Good, then it might be worth relaxing the guildlines - what would be the downside? I think a lot of people that like writing new articles don't like the fine tuning that is required to get from Good to Featured, so if we don't let them write new stuff we'll just lose them. We might as well have them doing something. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
