> But of the people who contribute them, many can be encouraged to > learn how to write adequate articles and perhaps become regular > contributors. People who write inadequate unsourced promotional > articles can be simply rejected, or alternatively helped to write > good ones or at least realize and understand why their topic is > unsuitable and respect us for our standards.
But how? > It's not the articles we need, as much as the contributors, with the > possibility of interesting them in working on other ones also. True, true. I'd pick another contributor over another article any day. Emily On Sep 18, 2009, at 10:47 AM, David Goodman wrote: > " the overwhelming majority of speedily deleted articles deserve to be > so." -- yes, so they do. But of the people who contribute them, many > can be encouraged to learn how to write adequate articles and perhaps > become regular contributors. People who write inadequate unsourced > promotional articles can be simply rejected, or alternatively helped > to write good ones or at least realize and understand why their topic > is unsuitable and respect us for our standards. If one out of ten > respond favorably to our endeavors, we'll gain 100 good contributors a > day. > > What is required is the patience to deal properly with all of them, > although only a minority will respond as we would like them to. That > minority is a lot of people, and we need them. It is worth a day's > effort, to rescue for us one contributor and possibly their article. > It's not the articles we need, as much as the contributors, with the > possibility of interesting them in working on other ones also. > > All comments at wikipedia that include the phrase "just another " > ignore the possibility of working with the individuals. There may be > common types of bad articles, but each has a person behind it, and > there are no people who are "just another" > > David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG > > > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Charles Matthews > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Amory Meltzer wrote: >>> I wouldn't exactly call that post "nice." It reads to me like just >>> another person complaining. >> Actually this is not so much an example on bullying, but on >> _precisely_ >> why we have WP:COI. >> >> The hill has "five rope tows and seven ski runs". Is this an >> encyclopedic topic? Not really. >> >> If someone has no personal stake in [[Kettlebowl]], they will no >> doubt >> take the line that it hardly matters whether it is in Wikipedia or >> not. >> If they do, they will take every attempt to delete in line with >> guidelines as a personal affront. >> >> Charles >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
