On a serious note, no harm done. While 80 000 is quite a lot, who’s hurt? The user who is looking with incorrect term? No, he found what he’s looking for. The joker? No, she got the laughs. The organisation? No, it’s not paid work.
Nothing they had written was incorrect, on a site the size of Wikipedia, adding more true but functionally useless pages is only ever a (very minor) benefit. If there were only 1000 pages, sure, it’d be clutter. But it is already the case that to find anything you have to search for it, meaning it is a net positive to create those pages.
Lol this article was so worth the click . Possibly one of the most graphic and enjoyable one i have ever read . Also on a serious note WHAT THE FUCK ?
On a serious note, no harm done. While 80 000 is quite a lot, who’s hurt? The user who is looking with incorrect term? No, he found what he’s looking for. The joker? No, she got the laughs. The organisation? No, it’s not paid work.
Everyone wins. Weird, but not at all harmful.
Slightly confused by your last point, about the org itself, could you expand?
This seems to imply to me that the organisation could never be “hurt” because it’s volunteer run, which I doubt is what you were saying.
I certainly can. I was referring to waste of time and question of efficiency.
Nothing they had written was incorrect, on a site the size of Wikipedia, adding more true but functionally useless pages is only ever a (very minor) benefit. If there were only 1000 pages, sure, it’d be clutter. But it is already the case that to find anything you have to search for it, meaning it is a net positive to create those pages.
No i am just suprised about the motivation.