Miscellaneous Grab Bag, Articles too horrible to dedicate attention to individually Options

[Donny]

This could be a fun game -- click random articles and assess the results for citations, viewpoint, grammar and accuracy.

I got http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Borges. It's a little boring. Can I play twice?
Second try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbira. Ooh. Nice article.
Third try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Little. Short but fairly informative.
Fourth try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umiastowski. Seems like a useful article.
Fifth try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_setting. Short but apparently useful.
Sixth try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbie_Conal. Interesting article, I liked it. Again rather short.
Seventh try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rattus_Norvegicus_%28album%29. I used to have that album. Article is rather short, again.
Eighth try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-down_planning. This is the first really lame article I've hit.
Ninth try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Angus_Association. Short but mildly interesting.
Last try: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minamimatsura...ict%2C_Nagasaki. Very short robot stub?

The only really good article I hit was the Mbira one, but none of the others except Top down planning were outstandingly bad. They all seemed to be a little short, and perhaps not very well researched.

[Mister Die]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.H._Carr

As encyclopedic as a magazine or perhaps critical journal article. Complete with photos coupled with "descriptions" such as "The Face of the Future?" and "The Price of Progress?" Not to mention "The American historian Richard Pipes. In 1993 Pipes was to write that Carr's History of Soviet Russia was no different from Holocaust denial."

It looks big and scholarly at first, but underneath it all is basically one continuous "eff you, Mr. Subject" vibe. It really doesn't look very encyclopedic at all.

This post has been edited by Mister Die:

[EricBarbour]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.H._Carr

Did it already. That, FYI, is one of the longest biographies on Wikipedia, and is the work of one obsessed crank.

[Mister Die]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.H._Carr

Did it already.

Where? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

And yeah, it's long and lame. I think the sheer size of an article plays a significant role in people being reluctant to edit it.