On 10/16/06, Rory Stolzenberg <rory096(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/16/06, Robth <robth1(a)gmail.com> wrote:
{{Cleanup}} is a ticket to a year-long line. If
we want to get
these issues addressed with any kind of speed (and it's clear
from the start of this thread that we do), any system that we
come up with needs to be as unlike {{cleanup}} as possible.
Personally, I suspect that the only way to handle these things
is to do them yourself. I long ago gave up on the notion of
article tags being an effective way to get anything but the most
trivial (and thus edit-count-building) maintenance work done.
Not true, cleanup also has a huge amount of articles, and while there's a
backlog, there's also a lot of people working on it. Currently,
[[Category:Articles with unsourced statements]] has a massive, totally
disorganized backlog, and was actually deleted a couple months ago because
it was so hopeless. A cleanup-like system would be a huge improvement, and
allow us to take care of the ones that most need sourcing first.
I'm well aware of the situation; I spent several months doing a lot of
cleanup work
before getting burned out on it. There are people working on cleanup,
it is true.
At the same time, the backlog is growing rapidly, and an (admittedly, highly
unscientific) examination of what happens to de-tagged articles that I did in
August suggested that much of what gets de-tagged doesn't actually get
cleaned up much. My point above was that, in general, maintenance tags are not
the answer; they lead people to assume that they can get something fixed
just by sticking a tag on it, when in fact the only way to get something fixed
in a timely fashion (and sometimes at all) is to do it yourself.
--
Robth
(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Robth)