That's the list I was thinking of. The cleanup process is currently so bogged down that it's hard to know what needs to be done, though. In the meantime, I've created a template -- {{cleanup-priority}}, which currently is a cleanup tag for any articles which are of sub-par quality on that list (and should only be limited to that list, I think), hopefully it will help focus things a bit. (If people disagree with the "prioritization", well, they can argue that on the list itself -- if we have such a list, and take it at least partially seriously, then I think using it as a base for a prioritization scheme is a good idea).

The only reason for specialization is that currently {{cleanup}} is applied to hundreds and hundreds of articles, many of which are not very high-profile and thus not high-priority. I don't think it's the end-all solution but it seemed like a reasonable change to make. It seems to me that cleanup in general has two purposes: one, to indicate that it is known that a particular article is in a state of disrepair and to help encourage people who stumble across that article to repair it. The second is to give people interested in generally improving Wikipedia the ability to find articles which could use attention. The advantage of a little specialization would, I believe, be to aid the latter usage more than the former. All of the characters and topics in the "priority" category are also so well known that there are literally dozens of books written on them, they are present in every other encyclopedia available, and there are hundreds upon hundreds of webpages on them. Writing a biography of [[Bill Gates]] takes no specialized knowledge or training. I was able to add a substantial amount to the article just by cutting and pasting content from the other articles we have relating to Microsoft (Microsoft, History of Microsoft Windows, and United States v. Microsoft, specifically). That took about 15 minutes worth of work. This is stuff *anyone* can do if they want to. "If they want to" is of course the operative part. Specialization can be enabling -- *if* someone wants to work on a general article, it's a good way to direct them to things which need attention -- but it does not compel action in and of itself. That's a bigger question, and worth thinking about seriously, though I don't have any specific ideas regarding it at the moment, personally. FF On 10/7/05, steve v <vertigosteve(a)yahoo.com> wrote: thats "process the upgrades. bit in particular there opening be which to bit. that _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l