This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rentaferret (talk | contribs) at 18:22, 22 August 2006 (→Alternatives to speedy: update comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:22, 22 August 2006 by Rentaferret (talk | contribs) (→Alternatives to speedy: update comment)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| This is a subpage of TruthbringerToronto's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
|
| 1 2 |
Alternatives to speedy
Thanks for the note. Points taken, but I'm not getting articles written that I'd like to write because I'm forever trying to "save" bad articles. (For example, I spent roughly 7 hours working on Billy Brandt yesterday because the article lacked any substantial references and most likely was in danger of being nominated for deletion.) The only reason I knew about these short "less-than-stubs" (in my opinion) articles was that they were being wikilinked to pages that I monitor fairly closely (although I found a few other edits that needed to be made when I was reverting the links). Regardless of the potential for the article, nothing that short should be posted in the namespace, that's what sandboxes are for. This just encourages the "shotgun" method of article creation: start a bunch of stubs and then never do any further work on them, leave all the research to someone else. I don't think that's right. I see that some of the speedy nom's were deleted, some nominated for deletion. If the administrator reviewing the speedy tag disagrees with my placing it, they have the authority to change the tag. Thanks.—Chidom 18:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)