User:4meter4/DYK: An affirmation of purpose and mission

Wikipedia:Did you know (DYK) is a program within wikipedia whose purpose is to expand wikipedia's compendium of topics. It is an effective tool for encouraging expansion of wikipedia's coverage; a goal which is central to achieving wikipedia's primary purpose of creating a free encyclopedia which contains the sum of all human knowledge. Unlike Wikipedia:Featured articles (FA) or Wikipedia:Good articles (GA), DYK's primary interest is not article quality but article creation and expansion. This focus on expansion or quantity as opposed to quality has drawn criticism from some editors. Regular contributors to DYK will be familiar with the often raised concerns over the quality of the articles featured within the "Did you know..." section of wikipedia's main page. For those new to this topic, I will highlight the main objections often raised:

• 1. DYK only features new content or articles which have been expanded 5xs. There are generally two main camps who oppose this limitation. The first camp are those who value the quality of the article over any other consideration. These editors feel that DYK should be altered to feature articles that have been recently improved in terms of quality, instead of considering the "newness" of the article. Generally editors taking this view are those who are active at Wikipedia:Good articles (GA). GA currently does not have a spot on the main page of wikipedia, and there have been frequent attempts by GA editors to take over DYK for GA purposes for several years now. The GA criteria would in essence replace DYK's criteria for inclusion under their proposal. The second group which opposes DYK's new content requirements are those who point out the difficulty of expanding larger articles that still need work 5xs. This group is still interested in adding new content, but feels the 5x expansion is too strict of a requirement and should be lowered.

• 2. DYK allows articles with a minimum of 1500 character prose count to be featured. Critics of this policy feel that some DYK approved articles are in fact stubs, and that it is embarassing to wikipedia to have such articles featured on wikipedia's main page. Proponents on the other hand point out that some subjects have only a limited amount of content in reliable sources available, and that longer articles would therefore be impossible to create on certain topics. All atempts at raising the prose count standards have as of now been rejected.

• 3. DYK gives out rewards to editors for creating articles. This incentive sometimes leads to editors creating articles as quickly as possible to the detriment of article quality. These editors in several instances are those who have been involved at DYK for years. This criticism has been used by some to challenge DYK's fundamental value. There have been various solutions raised to solve this issue, some more radical than others. Some have suggested toughening quality standards at DYK (i.e. stiffer referencing requirements, longer prose count requirements, etc.) Others have proposed completely altering DYK by making it no longer about new articles but quality articles. (i.e. the GA camp). Still others have suggested setting limitations on the number of submissions each editor can make.

• 4. DYK features boring articles/hooks. Those lobbying this criticism usually suggest making "interestingness" an enforced requirement at DYK. Opponents point out that "interestingness" is subjective and is therefore a criteria that can not be implemented fairly.

Now that the main objections have been dilineated, I will now explain why DYK is important to wikipedia in its current form in spite of some of its inherent weaknesses. Ultimately, all of the issues raised above boil down to the issue of quality versus quantity. It is a fact that DYK has always emphasized quantity over quality and I do not feel those involved at DYK should apologize for this. It is not a coincidence that pretty much every editor that complains about DYK are those who participate in either GA/FA or both. These editors have become obsessed with improving wikipedia's quality, which is the point of the reward system at GA and FA. This is a good thing. We want editors to want to create quality articles. Yet, wikipedia also aims to create the widest coverage possible since our goal is to have a free encyclopedia which contains the sum of all human knowledge. Therefore, expansion (i.e. quantity) is also a goal of the encyclopedia. While GA/FA were created to stimulate quality, DYK was created to stimulate quantity.

The truth is that wikipedia needs both quality and quantity to achieve its purpose and maintain its relevance. With the total knowledge of humanity more than doubling every year according to some sources, there will always be a need to continue creating/expanding articles. The need for more article creation is never going to go away. Likewise the best quality article possible is the most desirable article to the reader, and therefore the need for quality will never go away. Therefore incentives for both quantity and qaulity are needed. DYK is the only award incentive on wikipedia for expansion other than wiki cup; which is a different niche as it is a contest with only a small number of editors involved. On the flip side, we have two rewards for quality on wikipedia: GA and FA.

There should be room for programs that inspire article creation in addition to programs that inspire article quality. In an ideal situation, a program can do both. However, as a pragmatist I don't think it's possible to do both at the same time well. We could easily go to FA/GA and complain that their standards are too high and therefore not enough editors are interested in working on improving articles to FA/GA status. Yet, if FA/GA lowers it standards it would be bad for the encyclopedia. Likewise, raising the standards for inclusion too high at DYK would prevent it from doing what it is supposed to do: generate new articles. That is not to say that standards at DYK can't or shouldn't be altered, but that all alterations made at DYK should be viewed through the question "will this new policy help or hinder further article creation?" If it prevents the encouragement of new articles in a significant way, than it probably isn't the right policy for DYK.

In conclusion, DYK is the only program dedicated to rewarding the creation of new content within wikipedia itself; making it is both a unique and vital institution within the encyclopedia's community. While it does often produce articles of lesser quality, the vast majority of DYK articles are not bad articles, merely sufficient ones. One has to only look at any given DYK queue to see they are not articles in a horrible state, but are in general mostly mediocre articles with a few good articles mixed in. There are other award incentives on wikipedia, i.e. GA/FA, which do stimulate the raising of article quality to higher levels. Wikipedia, therefore does not need DYK to become another quality control program. It does, however, need DYK to continue doing what it does: encourage the creation of new content.