Talk:Throat

Reference

The first reference link doesn't work, please remove. I dont know how. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.135.158.20 (talk) 07:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. 81.23.54.142 (talk) 21:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Stub or not?

PamD, you removed the stub notice I added. What is your criteria that this article is not a stub? Did you go by numbers - 3 paragraphs, 15 sentences, 256 words, 1254 characters? Even going by the characters standard, this is a stub. Especially for a topic - Throat. Please justify. Jay ^(Talk) 16:30, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

@Jay: Yes: three well-sourced paragraphs and a couple of useful illustrations, plus the fact that it has been assessed by other editors as "Start" (see talk page). There is no template to add to say "This article should be expanded", although there is the "This section needs to be expanded" template which you previously added. If you think this article is seriously inadequate, divide it into sections and label the section(s) which need expansion - or expand it. Or perhaps post here on the talk page to discuss what more you think the article should include. Thanks. PamD 16:45, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I only looked at WP:Stub and did not realize it runs contrary to the content assessment ratings. So are there rules that if an article has a content rating that is not stub, we cannot add a stub notice, or if an article is content assessed as not stub, an existing stub notice can be removed? I did not add the section expand notice though, Kenzie.one did. Jay ^(Talk) 17:50, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Added back stub tag as no response was forthcoming. Jay (talk) 06:37, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Jay, stub sorter here; it is not a stub: multiple sourcing, multiple paragraphs, infobox w/ image. However, it is certainly on the border between start and stub so it is understandable. Curbon7 (talk) 06:44, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

So again, are you going by the content assessment ratings or WP:Stub? Jay (talk) 07:28, 21 November 2021 (UTC)