Supporters of this rule include:
tbc
Opponents include:
- 24 (strongly--some topics are so controversial this is the best you can do.)
- maveric149 (mildly; some people have lots to say about a single aspect of a topic -- should they not contribute all they can just because the other parts of a topic have not been filled in yet?)
- 63.192.137.21 (agree with maveric149. Writers should not refrain from writing what they know best because other aspects on the same page are lacking. An encyclopedia is a compilation of information, i.e. the more the better. If someone writes a lot of details on one aspect, other writers should add to other aspects to achieve the balance. Never balance an article by reducing one aspect.)
Other opinions:
- Martin -- I think there's a middle ground to be struck here. We should strive for the ideal of a complete, balanced article, but in the process of getting there the article will often be unbalanced - and that's a good thing.
"in 1000 years"? Give me a break!
The language of English Wikipedia will sound like Old English to them.
Changed to fifty.
--Damian Yerrick
- Will it? The invention of the printing press and now mass means of communication has greatly standardized English. I don't forsee nearly as much change in the language in the next 1000 years as has occurred in the last 1000. It will probably become more technical and internationalized and sure certain words will fall into disuse and be replaced by others but unless there is another dark age in that time period or English becomes a marginalized language, then I don't forsee revolutionary changes - just evolutionary ones. That said I don't mind the text change. --mav 00:54 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)