On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 7:04 PM, David Gerard <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/10/30 geni <[email protected]>: >> 2009/10/30 David Gerard <[email protected]>: >>> 2009/10/30 WereSpielChequers <[email protected]>: > >>>> I'm hoping that we won't have too many "trick" articles in this >>>> process, or articles that should be deleted but not by CSD (the >>>> criteria are "write an article that doesn't meet the deletion >>>> criteria". > >>> Yeah, any such article ahs to be done in good faith, not an attempt to >>> catch people out. The test criterion is anonymity. Write as good an >>> article as you would in your known identity. > >> Not a reasonable test since anything that heavy with markup is >> unlikely to look anything like something created by a new user. > > I fear it won't be that bad a test. Try doing your usual editing as an > anon. You'll be surprised just how preremptorily anons get treated > these days, and the excuses for the clearly unthinking actions. ("How > dare you! I couldn't possibly cope with the load if I had to think > about what I was doing!" Really.)
Well, I'm slated to do my regular once-a-month spate of article creation (yes, really, it's that bad), but I do this (and all editing) under my account (the only one I've ever had). But I do try and create the article in the best possible state, drafting and previewing it for several hours. I suppose my version of this test would be to create an article in sub-stub format, and see whether someone jumps on it before I improve it? But I'm stuck on which of these terms to write an article on: 1) "sword brother" (bit lightweight) 2) "heroic code" (good number of Google Scholar hits) 3) "heroic friendship" (nebulous concept, difficult to pin down) Any suggestions? Anyone saying "all three" will get a wet trout slap. I'm leaning towards heroic code, but unlike most articles I start, it is one that I don't really have access to enough sources to flesh out the article enough. The last time I did that was here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arctic_expeditions But it is gratifying to see that article (well, list) continuing to grow and improve. To try and bring this post back on-topic, I suppose my point is that stub articles on obscure topics would probably fare even worse if a new editor submitted them. Is that a valid point? That obscure topics need experienced Wikipedians to start the articles going, as opposed to new editors trying to do the same? Carcharoth _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
