On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Ian Woollard <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/1/11 Carcharoth <[email protected]>: >> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Ian Woollard <[email protected]> wrote: >>> 2009/1/11 Carcharoth <[email protected]>: >>>> That would mess up linking between articles. >>> >>> No, it would create red links, which would help people find the >>> sub-par article and encourage them to improve it. >>> >>> Red links are usually considered to be broadly positive. >> >> I agree red links are positive, but people generally think redlinks >> are the absence of an article. Clicking on a redlink normally gets a >> screen asking if you want to create an article, not "can you improve >> this article". A different colour link leading to the "incubation" >> namespace is probably what you are thinking of, and might work. > > This is all hypothetical, but I was thinking that if the article was, > according to the values you had set, underwater, then the links to it > would be red, and clicking on them would lead you, not to the article > page, but to a page with a link to be able to see and edit the subpar > article.
I'm not thinking here of articles being rated to allow reader-side filtering by setting a value, but of AfD having a userspace to send grossly subpar articles to, rather then sending them to userspace. It depends how often userfication is successful in producing an improved and acceptable article. In many cases, bold recreation can work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_(online_game) On the other hand, date context is still a remarkably hard skill to knock into people's heads: "Threshold was, for three consecutive years, The MUD Journal's highest-rated role-playing game." Quite why the article doesn't bother to say *which* three consecutive years these were, I don't know. But getting back to the recreation aspect. Once you *see* an acceptable article or stub in place on the ground (after the required work has been done, and lots of work is often needed), then many objections melt away. One pitfall, in your system and mine, is who decides when to move articles from the incubation namespace to the main namespace (and vice versa) and in your system who decides what the rating of a particular article should be to fit the reader-set filtering? All hypothetical, as you say. At the moment, the best approach is rigorously sourced stubs that can slowly grow over time - slower than they would if it was just fans of the game or similar editors working on it, but of better quality for being held to a higher standard. Carcharoth _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
