Ah, fair point. I hadn't thought of that one. Apply an opt-out policy to said stubs,
in which case (but not to other BLPs)?
CM
Odi profanum vulgus et arceo.
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 17:24:10 +0100
From: james.farrar(a)gmail.com
To: wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] An example of a bad biography
2008/4/29 Christiano Moreschi <moreschiwikiman(a)hotmail.co.uk>uk>:
Not really. If an article's always going to be a stub, there's no point having
it all.
I disagree that a BLP is ever "always" going to be a stub - in this
specific case, many union leaders go into politics; at the least, he
may turn into another [[Bob Crow]].
Our inability to predict the future extends to other categories of
article, too. For instance, before 1st August 2007, many might have
said that [[I-35W Mississippi River bridge]] was "always going to be a
stub". Having it existing as a stub probably helped editors build it
up when it became somewhat more notable than it previously had been.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_________________________________________________________________
Play the Andrex Hello Softie Game & win great prizes