| Line 110: |
Line 110: |
| | By the way, I made a point of not looking at the article history. I don't know who made it, and I don't want to know. I'm just afraid that the admirable goal of helping the encyclopedia has sort of been lost in the rush to [http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=117723 rack up raw numbers]. (E2's experiences in this regard may be enlightening, although it has a very, very different mission.) [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 10:20, 12 July 2007 (EDT) | | By the way, I made a point of not looking at the article history. I don't know who made it, and I don't want to know. I'm just afraid that the admirable goal of helping the encyclopedia has sort of been lost in the rush to [http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=117723 rack up raw numbers]. (E2's experiences in this regard may be enlightening, although it has a very, very different mission.) [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 10:20, 12 July 2007 (EDT) |
| | ::Fix it if you don't Like it :P And as for the quality of entries, you obviously don't remember wikipedia when it first started. It was a mess of cruddy one liners (and it still has a whole shed load of crappy one liners, except they justify them by tagging "stub"...); over the years, some were deleted, some were expanded, some were merged into more cohesive units. What is it with all the critics here who expect every entry to be a graduate-level thesis on the subject? [[Image:User Fox.png]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 10:28, 12 July 2007 (EDT) | | ::Fix it if you don't Like it :P And as for the quality of entries, you obviously don't remember wikipedia when it first started. It was a mess of cruddy one liners (and it still has a whole shed load of crappy one liners, except they justify them by tagging "stub"...); over the years, some were deleted, some were expanded, some were merged into more cohesive units. What is it with all the critics here who expect every entry to be a graduate-level thesis on the subject? [[Image:User Fox.png]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 10:28, 12 July 2007 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | Heh, {{tl|sofixit}}, then, huh? ;D |
| | + | |
| | + | Well, the problem is that I can't fix it. It's misnamed, and the article is useless. There's also almost nothing to say on the subject that doesn't belong in, say, [[pitching]]. Its origin comes from the use in common English of "ace" to mean "the best." Its use in baseball is exactly congruous to its use in English. |
| | + | |
| | + | Wikipedia dealt with this problem with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT What Wikipedia is not], which attempted to narrow things to encyclopedia articles. (A full history on this obviously requires more space than this really needs.) Everything2, which admittedly has very different goals from this project, dealt with this problem by automatically adding public domain content outside the individual-user reward scheme. |
| | + | |
| | + | I don't have a problem with short articles other people can fix. (These are a Good Thing.) Indiscriminate, contentless articles nobody can really fix aren't so hot. [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 10:43, 12 July 2007 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | ::I looked at the history to see who created it, and I'd like to say that it wasn't done by one of the contestants, but instead I'll point out that you don't (yet) know how the contest judges will score it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:38, 12 July 2007 (EDT) | | ::I looked at the history to see who created it, and I'd like to say that it wasn't done by one of the contestants, but instead I'll point out that you don't (yet) know how the contest judges will score it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:38, 12 July 2007 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :::Right, I don't. I was hoping bringing it to the judges' attention would help make sure this sort of thing doesn't get scored. [[User:AManInBlack|AManInBlack]] 10:43, 12 July 2007 (EDT) |