On 12/16/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/16/05, Anthony DiPierro
<wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
On 12/15/05, Chris Owen
<ronthewarhero(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
1) New articles should go somewhere outside the
main
namespace until reviewed and passed. They should *not*
immediately enter the main namespace.
I never understood the purpose of having a queue. It takes just as
much time to delete something from the queue as it does to delete an
article. Move the articles with problems (that aren't speedy deletes)
*into* the queue(s). Keep the ones that don't have problems right
where they are.
Anthony
Yes, it won't necessarily lower the workload, but it would certainly
improve the quality of our articles.
Mgm
How? The quality of the articles is exactly equal if someone puts
them into a queue and you delete it or someone creates it and you
delete it.
The question is whether or not to keep substandard articles. The meat
of the proposal is to keep unreferenced, unlinked, and/or unformatted
articles out of the article namespace. I agree with that. What I
don't agree with is the crappy implementation of it.
Instead of building queues and restricting editing and moving good
articles out of the queues, just move the bad articles into the
queues. Start [[Wikipedia:Articles without references]], and move new
articles without references to a subpage. Start [[Wikipedia:Articles
without formatting]], and move new articles without formatting to a
subpage. Start [[Wikipedia:Articles without wikilinks]], and move new
articles without wikilinks to a subpage. You accomplish all the same
things without forcing the good articles to go through a queue.
Anthony