Revision as of 06:34, 7 September 2006 edit DirkvdM (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 13,736 edits →Quick Question ← Previous edit		Revision as of 06:36, 7 September 2006 edit undo DirkvdM (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 13,736 edits →Quick Question Next edit →
Line 447: :::To DirkvdM, if non-notable articles were not deleted then we wouldn't be able to see the real articles for all the cruft. Do we really need articles on you or me. [[User:CambridgeBayWeather\|CambridgeBayWeather]] [[User_talk:CambridgeBayWeather\|(Talk)]] 11:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC) ::::Well, I've already got one on [[User:DirkvdM\|me]]. :) The only way I can see the cruft getting in the way (for users) is when one uses the [[Special:Allpages\|all ~~articles~~pages]] special page. This is, however, not a paper encyclopedia in which one looks thing up alphabetically. Maybe they get in the way for some administrative purposes (I can't think of any, though). In that case they may be tagged such that they can be excluded from such activities. Actually, tagging artcles for their encyclopedic status might make sense. Such as stubs, articles with shaky sources, biased articles. This could then be used to either ignore those or actually seek them out for certain purposes, the way you can exclude minor ~~changes~~edits from your watchlist. [[User:DirkvdM\|DirkvdM]] 06:34, 7 September 2006 (UTC) == Cambric ==

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous: Difference between revisions