From: Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)ctelco.net>
Why don't you just leave stubs alone and let them develop into articles
through a natural process?
Fred
That assumes that they _will_ develop into articles. Some stubs are
useful nuclei around which articles will crystallize. Others aren't. To
assume that all stubs are equally valuable is silly.
Stubs were probably more useful in Wikipedia's early days as
placeholders to flag important pieces of missing content than they are
now.
Let me try a test. I'm going to look in newpages right now. I am going
to look at the most recent new page with an article length of less than
200 bytes, and then I am going to look at most recent new page with an
article length between 200 and 300 bytes.
Most recent under-200-byte page:
**
IRISH LEPRECHAUN: A leprechaun is a creature from the folklore of the
irish...it is believed that such creatures are related to fairies.
according to tales of these beasts, if followed, they can lead one to a
pot of gold at the end of the rainbow
**
Given that we have a 2469-byte article on "Leprechaun" (which is short
on serious or scholarly folkloric content, but is a decent description
of the leprechaun as known in modern popular culture--and includes
everything in "Irish Leprechaun" and more.)
Do you seriously think that "Irish Leprechaun" should be left to grow?
Do you think it is going to become a scholarly essay on how Irish
leprechauns differ from those of other nations? Or do you think it
should become a redirect to "Leprechaun"
Most recent 200-to-300-byte page:
**
COTILLION: Cotillion is a formal presentation of young ladies to
society that have been recommended by a distinguished committee. The
beneficiary is Children's National Medical Center. The National
Debutante Cotillion and Thanksgiving Ball of Washington D.C. is 55
years old in 2004.
This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it .
**
Now, that, to me, is a perfectly reasonable stub.
I don't know that the 200-byte rule is infallible, but I just tried it
for the first time, and it seemed to work.
--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith(a)verizon.net
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at
http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/