:::No, the point would be to start your research with such a glossary (for example) and then writing an article based on it. I fear we're talking of more than a thousand glossary stubs by now (since you lurk on Rati<!-- -->onalWiki, you most likely know of my June 23 list - I linked to it from the Team Contest article there - and the copy-pasting started earlier than even that), and their information value is LOW. It would have made WAY more sense to just make a huge (and public) list of sources and then encourage people to actually write articles about them instead of just mindlessly copying. Tell me, how many of your copied articles (86 during their first 12 hours of the contest alone) have you actually expanded with your own writing? How many will you expand? Or is this a case of "Not my problem, you do it if you feel it's lacking"? | :::No, the point would be to start your research with such a glossary (for example) and then writing an article based on it. I fear we're talking of more than a thousand glossary stubs by now (since you lurk on Rati<!-- -->onalWiki, you most likely know of my June 23 list - I linked to it from the Team Contest article there - and the copy-pasting started earlier than even that), and their information value is LOW. It would have made WAY more sense to just make a huge (and public) list of sources and then encourage people to actually write articles about them instead of just mindlessly copying. Tell me, how many of your copied articles (86 during their first 12 hours of the contest alone) have you actually expanded with your own writing? How many will you expand? Or is this a case of "Not my problem, you do it if you feel it's lacking"? |