https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30208
Snottywong <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #74 from Snottywong <[email protected]> 2011-09-14 21:58:02 UTC --- (In reply to comment #67) > Take this article, for instance: > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CobraNet&oldid=115793918 > > I'd imagine that article would likely get speedy deleted now a days. A very nice jab at the first article I created, but your lack of knowledge is showing. If you have any familiarity with enwiki's speedy deletion criteria, you'd realize that even that stub doesn't qualify for speedy deletion. It asserts the notability of the subject when it says that it "is widely regarded as the first commercially successful implementation of audio over Ethernet." You can't speedy delete an article ONLY for not having references. And if you look merely one day later (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CobraNet&oldid=116324830) you'll see references have been added. If you have ever spent any time doing new page patrolling, you'd know that all but the most terrible articles spend at least 15-30 days on the newpages queue before a patroller gets around to reviewing it. The users who patrol the front of the queue generally only look at obvious vandalism articles. (In reply to comment #70) > Someone editing Wikipedia in their spare time, contributing useful information > may not wait 4 days. They may never come back. Then they probably wouldn't have stayed anyway. 4 days and 10 edits is not a large commitment, considering that most experienced longtime editors have well over 10,000 edits over the course of many years. In any case, all of these types of emotionally charged statements about what will or won't happen if we restrict article creation are all based on gut reactions. Wouldn't it be infinitely better if we could implement a brief trial, and then make well-informed statements like "exactly 22% of users who tried to create an article but were informed they couldn't did not eventually create their page and never came back." I would certainly prefer to have an intelligent conversation based on facts rather than trading anecdotes and gut feelings. (In reply to comment #69) > So, can we please move the discussion to [[mw:ArticleCreationWorkflow]] now? [[mw:ArticleCreationWorkflow]] doesn't discuss any real solutions to the problem, so I will not be contributing there. I agree that this bug report has served its purpose, so I'll mark it as resolved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
