"Philip Rayment" <PJRaym...@yahoo.com.au>, Sat, 24 May 2008 23:45:39 +1000:
We call it "soccer" too. "Football" is Aussie rules, or perhaps rugby,
depending on which state you live in.
In principle, I think it's a good idea to combine various trivial topics
into one topic, although it does get back to the question of how trivial is
trivial? That is, where do you draw the line?
But as for working to reduce the number of trivial articles, who was it that
wrote "two meters" and other such gems?
I don't recall Conservative ever saying anything about the size of the
article helping search-engine optimisation, and in fact I gather that
multiple articles all linking to each other (rather than one big article)
would actually improve the rankings. So I'd like to see more of us cutting
the bigger articles up into smaller ones.
Although I like Wikipedia (am I allowed to say that here?) for the sheer
amount of information, I do get frustrated at having to wade through big
articles to find what I'm looking for. More summary articles linking off to
other articles makes sense to me. I recently wrote Biblical anthropology,
and will (when I get around to it) put a (single-paragraph?) summary of it
in the Young Earth Creationism article. I'd also like to reduce the
Astronomy section in the YEC article (much of it is on the Starlight
Problem, for which there is already a separate article), and move the list
of young-earth evidences back to a separate article, leaving just a summary
of that in the YEC article.