|It has been suggested that this page be merged with Proposal:Apply levels of importance. (Discuss)|
Wikipedia, at last count, had 2,993,967 articles. This is a staggering number and testiment to the work of many people, however it betrays the fact that we have yet to raise the vital articles, articles that every encyclopedia needs, to a consistent quality. Of the level 1 vital articles, only 1 has reached even "Good article" status. At level 2 the ratio becomes arguably worse.
I think we owe it to ourselves and the status of Wikipedia as a respectable source of information, to improve the vital articles to a respectable level, even at the neglect of other articles. As much as it may be unpopular, I cannot think of a better way to improve the respectibility and impact of Wikipedia than this.
- Organise special groups/taskforces of users to participate in improving a vital article.
- Increase the motivation for users to improve these articles.
- Increase the coverage of these articles.
- Enlist and encourage experts in certain subjects to improve articles where content is lacking.
- Create or renew WikiProjects to be involved with the improvement of the articles.
- Educate the community how to write a broad, general article.
- Create a page where editors can post "projects" and ask for asistance or oversight.
The core topics/vital articles are the most critical and important that Wikipedia has. Additionally they are some of the most visited articles too. Wikipedia would undoubtedly achieve more respect as a source of information if these articles were of a good standard.
- Would we be willing to enlist specialist and expert users in their fields to improve these articles? Would this damage Wikipedia's 'everyone appeal' or simply be a necessary step in areas that are neglected?
- How far should/could other articles be neglected to improve these vital articles?
- Why is an en.wp only proposal strategic for the WMF ?
A potential, but highly unlikely, cost could be the hiring of specialist editors and experts to improve articles in their field. However, there are a wide range of other (free) alternatives, meaning this would be a last resort.
Do you have a thought about this proposal? A suggestion? Discuss this proposal by going to Proposal Talk:Core topics complete.
Want to work on this proposal?
- .. Sign your name here!