Quantum redactiones paginae "Vicipaedia:Gravitas" differant

Any respectable big & general encyclopedia will have, say, 10,000 core articles. Probably more than 5,000 of Vicipaedia's current articles are outside an ideal core, but Vicipaedia is making progress, though many core articles remain mere stubs. In music, it has an article on J. S. Bach, but not one on Arnold Schoenberg; in painting, it has Michelangelo, but not Caravaggio, and it has Monet, but not Manet. For music, the list of composers is a start, but even that list is inflated with the names of composers who wouldn't appear on any knowledgeable specialist's "core list" of the 100 most influential composers. Such spottiness is almost a given for a wiki. For example, in Islamic affairs, we have an article on [[Abdul Rahman]], a symbolic nonentity, but nothing on [[Sayyid Qutb]], a highly influential scholar, and nothing on hundreds of Islamic personalities historically more influential than Rahman. Right now, we have many articles on German & Italian towns & cities, but few on East Asian & South Asian towns & cities. And so on. ¶ In addition, a Latin encyclopedia could excel in having articles about Latinists, deeds done by native Latin-speakers, and works & concepts originally produced in Latin or relating to Latin. In that regard, it lags behind the wikis in several other languages, but I think it will catch up as time goes on. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] 16:25, 17 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

:Some interesting points there. I think other Wikipedias get a lot of place-name articles in using an automated method. Is that true? Should we do it? Would it be useful here? <font face="Gill Sans">[[Usor:Andrew Dalby|A]]<font color="green">[[:en:User:Andrew Dalby|nd]]</font>'''[[:en:User Talk:Andrew Dalby|rew D]]'''<font color="green">[[:en:User:Andrew Dalby/Bibliography|alby]]</font></font> 17:08, 17 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

 

==Disputationes==