On 12/09/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/12/06, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> So when a writer's done their best to meet
the criteria on the FAC
> checklist (except maybe the vague and subjective 'exceptional' one),
> is there a mechanism that will not feel like too much bloody work for
> little gain?
Might not an alternative be increasing the gain,
rather than
decreasing the work? ;-)
Oh, definitely. But basically, if I'm going to put in a FAC's worth of
work, I want to know what's in it for the article, or for me
bothering.
Good Articles was supposed to be a lightweight alternative, but
conspicuously isn't. So, same problem: what's in it for the article,
or for me bothering? The FA or GA mark is nice but doesn't seem to
justify the ridiculous slog.
To reach 100,000 FAs or GAs - at which point we could in fact look
Britannica in the eye on quality - will take a parallel process that
isn't turned into stupid amounts of effort for little or no reward.
- d.
- d.