Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Cruft

Personally I hate the word "cruft". It has been said earlier. One person's cruft is another person's essential info. We don't neccessarily need to sweep it up and hide it, but I don't think we should have a bunch of mediocre stubs hanging around when in the case of Pokemon they can be put in a list and break out if there's actually a good amount of info for an article. I'd also like the fact that there's a general page creation attitude. People prefer creating articles over improving existing ones, which means a lot of minor facts and bits of information are put in their own stubs when, really, they could be helpful in helping along an existing article. We should encourage people to find a home for their factoids in existing articles and cut down on stubs where possible and needed. True stubs can be improved, but when you're article ends up at AfD, you already made a mistake. Good stubs have enough info to show the subject can sustain a seperate article. I've ranted enough for now, Sleep tight. Mgm On 9/10/05, James D. Forrester <james(a)jdforrester.org> wrote: