[WikiEN-l] Next experiment: switch off AFD for a month. (was Guardian in defense of Wikipedia)

Wed Dec 14 12:48:11 UTC 2005

On 12/13/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
> > I find the unreferenced tag to be useless.  Either it says that the
> > article contains some unreferenced facts, in which case we'd be better
> > off tagging those few articles which don't contain unreferenced facts
> > with the opposite tag,
>
>
> Then it shouldn't be used to tag the article. That's not what it's for.
>
This could certainly be made more clear.  Right now it's on the top of
[[Homosexuality and Christianity]], which was the first one I checked.

(Maybe I should add a tag which says "This article has a tag on it
which isn't appropriate.  You can help Wikipedia by removing the
tag.")

> > or it says that the article contains zero
> > references, which is already evident to anyone scanning the article
> > anyway.
>
>
> The tag puts the article in the category. It also looks like a big ugly
> box telling the editor "PLEASE DO BETTER KTHX."
>
I can think of ways to make the template even uglier, if that really
is the point of it.

> > If you want to put the tag on the talk page or use a category, in the
> > case of articles with absolutely no references, I wouldn't object.
> > But I don't think that is a solution for what I'm saying, which is
> > that we shouldn't be creating such articles in the first place.
>
>
> I suggest that we can only lead by example and peer pressure, and the
> template does IMO help there.
>
>
> - d.

I guess you're saying the template has been a success.  I sure haven't
seen this.

Anthony