Template talk:Stub/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions about Template:Stub. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

NOTICE: New type of stub

A new type of stub has been created: it's called a substub. Substubs are like regular stubs, only even smaller. You can read more about the difference between stubs and substubs here, or view examples of stubs vs. substubs. There is also a new substub template message; the new message is meant to replace the normal stub message, but only where, of course, an article is a substub instead of a stub. The new message looks like:

This article is a substub. A substub is even smaller than a normal stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

You can use this new message by either replacing {{stub}} with {{substub}} in cases when a stub is more accurately described as a substub, or simply inserting {{substub}} at the bottom of an article. Many substubs are automatically listed on Wikipedia:Shortpages. You can discuss this new type of stub here, on the template message's talk page, or, preferably, on the substub talk page itself. -- Mike Storm 03:09, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Paragraphing stub message

I was thinking, wouldn't be better if the stub message was rendered as a paragraph (or even centered)? That way it wouldn't "merge" with the article text, as it currently does, and it'd look more like a warning — Kieff 09:10, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

Adding a div to allow user css to override stub display

Copied from Village pump - this discuss provides the reasoning for why we have a div inside the template - it allows users to decide to blank the template for themselves only, if they wish.

Wouldn't it be cool if the contents of a template could be overridden on a per-user basis, like we do with the style sheets and javascript. Then I could blank templates like {{stub}} and {{substub}} because I don't find them useful (I can see that it's a short article, ok!) but others who like these messages for whatever reason can still see them. Whatlinkshere etc would still work as they do now. Pcb21| Pete 07:23, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Good idea, like class='urlexpansion' for a text that may or may not be displayed.--Patrick 10:09, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I think you could get that effect by editing Template:stub, enclosing the text in <div class="template" id="stub">...</div> and then putting div.template#stub { display: none; } into your monobook.css. I didn't dare try that one out on the live Template:stub, though, but a test using Template:testing showed that it works for the display. However, Template:testing has a link to User:Lupo/temp (a test page of mine), and "What links here" on User:Lupo/temp didn't show the page I had included "{{testing}}" on, only the template itself did. Is this normal, or are some templates (e.g. Template:stub) handled differently so that the pages including the template show up on "What links here" on Wikipedia:Perfect stub article? Oh, and BTW, could some admin please delete Template:testing again? Thanks. Lupo 11:34, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Deleted Bmills 12:14, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

No, you are seeing the standard whatlinkshere behaviour for all templates. Thus I think this solution works. The only argument against it is that it complicates the wikitext when editing the template. When considering who edits template pages (experienced), I think this cost is worthwhile - obviously the talk page and an HTML comment will make clear what is happening. What do others think? Pcb21| Pete 12:11, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

These complexities can themselves be hidden in a template. See User:Pcb21/stub test and its includees. Pcb21| Pete 12:33, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Fine, then let's go for it! (Frankly said, I don't think the two-stage template solution in any simpler than just adding a <div> around the text. But I don't care very much about such a minor implementation detail, both are fine with me.) Lupo 12:41, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Ok, implemented directly. Pcb21| Pete 13:43, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

(Breaking out of indentation...) Pete, you said in your edit comment you weren't sure whether both the class and the id were needed. I used both because it allows selectively switching on or off individual templates, or the whole bunch of them. Consider the newly created {{substub}}: if you don't want to see those, but wanted to see the stub messages, you'd add only div.boilerplate#substub { display: none; } to your CSS. If you wanted to see no boilerplates at all, you might add a single div.boilerplate { display:none; }. If you don't want to see either stub message, but do want to see other boilerplates, you might add div.boilerplate#substub, div.boilerplate#stub { display: none; } to your CSS. Using both class and id gives users a little bit more flexibility, that's all. Lupo 09:06, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've requested this as a feature on feature suggestions. -- Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 15:32, 2004 Jul 22 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the helpful tutorial Lupo - I thought it might be something like that but wasn't certain so trod cautiously. Pcb21| Pete 16:15, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Aevar, what are you requesting? It seems to be working already?! Pcb21| Pete 16:15, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Oops, should've read that feature request page already. Yes what you suggest would an ideal way of doing things (presuming you can nest divs). Pcb21| Pete 16:18, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Random edits to the template

THE STUB MESSAGE IS STUPID SO I BLANKED IT. --216.229.223.247 09:09, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC) A.K.A. CoolDude

That's very nice. Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has now been removed. I have protected the stub page since in the past people have said it should be discussed on this talk page first anyway. I notice that many of the other significant templates were already protected anyway. --ssd 12:07, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Typo?

There is an extraneous space between "it" and the final period.

Thanks, Dominus 13:31, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, actually, there isn't; the code is as follows:

''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Perfect stub article|stub]]. You can [[Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub|help]] Wikipedia by [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]''.

The problem is that the skin can (and, for me, does) have a special little icon showing that the final link ("expanding it") is an external one, over and above the special colour highlight.

There isn't a way of removing this, sadly, though you don't notice it when the icon is there too (the browser leaves in a space for the icon even though it's not shown).

HTH.

And please, don't use H1s or full-caps in sections.

James F. (talk) 14:01, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, the result is particularly ugly in the skin I'm looking at, because the space is a simple space once it gets delivered to the browser, and it's easy for that to become a line break and hence an orphaned (widowed?) period. I do acknowledge the space isn't in the template itself. Can't the rendering code special-case this one? David Brooks 23:40, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Keep the stub and substub messages?

personally I say no, they are stupid, they make the article look tacky and no one pays attention to them.--Ryan B. (Talk, contributions) 08:12, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't support them in this form. A page (i.e. wikipedia:list of substubs), or putting the tag on the talk page would be better. anthony (see warning) [message edited after reply]

I disagree. I think they should be kept as is. --ssd 12:05, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I can see on talk pages, maybe, but they just look bad on a page and i bet nobody even sees that and adds to the article, at least not anyone who would see that the article is short, without the template and expand it.--Ryan B. (Talk, contributions) 05:20, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

If you feel this way, bring it up on the village pump, where more people will see your comments. --ssd 03:13, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm definitely in favor of keeping them. I certainly tend to pad out stub articles where I can; I'm sure I can't be the only one… — OwenBlacker 23:49, Aug 7, 2004 (UTC)

Blank the message using your personal CSS. That is the what the div is there for. Pcb21| Pete 21:13, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You've gotta be an editor to play with your personal CSS (and an advanced editor at that). One major reason why these stub messages shouldn't be all over the article's text is because they're only useful to editors. They also violate Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. anthony (see warning) 23:18, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

But everyone can be an editor, just push the edit button. I assume by "advanced editor" you mean someone who knows what they are doing. It would be nice to have a few examples somewhere of exactly what to do to hide the stub messages. Perhaps some nice person will leave one here or link to an existing one. --ssd 15:24, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Everyone (not banned) can be an editor, but the vast majority of people don't want to be. And by "advanced editor", well, someone who has the time to figure out how the hell to make the CSS do this. I don't even know how to do it myself, although I guess I could figure it out with enough effort. Maybe if this is made easier we can make an exception to the policy against the messages. anthony (see warning) 19:10, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Cat'ing articles as stubs is important for statistical purposes. Masterhomer

I think it would be better if the stub message were not so absolute. Something along the lines of "This article has been tagged as a stub, because some believe that it should be expanded". --NoPetrol 06:25, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Unprotect

Please unprotect this template, or I'll be forced to use a new template for stubs. Templated should not be protected. Good changes to Template:Protected have been possible because that template is not protected. --Cantus 17:45, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)

I don't think {{stub}} needs a big fancy div. Goplat 17:48, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes it does. Without the div it is impossible for users to override the message using their own personal CSS. As you can see from the above talk - lots of people want this. Pcb21| Pete 21:13, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This should stay protected. Changing this template invalidates the cache on thousands of pages. This causes too much load on the database to have it edit warred over. Angela . 17:11, Aug 17, 2004 (UTC)

No, I don't think any edit wars will result. Please unprotect it, or I, too, will have to use an alternate template to mark stubs. — El Chico! ^Talk 19:50, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Not everything has to be done in a hurry. Have some patience and post suggestions here; the template is protected for technical reasons. ✏ Sverdrup 20:27, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Protecting this template and forcing changes to be dropped here gives admins an unfair advantage. Not only can they decide against my copy if they don't like it, but their name will be attached to it in the edit history. I'm going to use User:El Chico/FreeStub to mark my stubs.

Edit the template, and drop a copy here, and I'll update the real one for you if nobody objects. ssd 06:37, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Big mistake, sorry

Big sorry for this edit, I meant to edit my test template, which I had unfortunately previously redirected to template:stub (I forget what I was trying then, but its there in the edit history if you want to check). I was working quickly, and ended up changing this by accident. If anything went wrong on my account (ie Speedy deletions, etc), I definately volunteer to undelete or fix anything. Thanks to Kate for speedily reverting it, and to anyone else who notified me or tried to fix it. —siro χ o 06:02, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)

Invalid HTML

in HTML (and XHTML) a tag can only have one class= in it. MediaWiki removes all but the last one. They're supposed to be combined, class="boilerplate metadata". Goplat 03:16, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Ditch the arrow

Psst. Add class="plainlinks". That is all. Oooo, .,-;''"";-,. ,oooO 04:24, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Metastub

Since the bug which caused Category:NaodW29-item6a1c86547e335864 stubs has been fixed, {{metastub}} is now available as a simple, consistent framework for stub templates (see Template:Stubs for its use). --[[User:Eequor|η υωρ]] 19:08, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, still without clue as to what to do with it, if anything. Maybe some instructions on the talk page? --Phil | Talk 10:36, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

For example, {{metastub|article=[[aircraft]]-related article|id=aerostub|category=Aircraft}} is a simplified version of Template:Aero-stub. It produces:

This aircraft-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

This provides a standard format for stub messages, which can be updated from a single location (instead of becoming unmanageable when changes are inevitably made). --[[User:Eequor|η υωρ]] 00:14, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Got that, but the "CSS ID" bit is escaping me: is there a list of values in use? --Phil | Talk 11:03, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)

Proposed rewording

I was inspired by the French version of the stub template when thinking of the following wording:

This article is a stub. If you know or can find out more information about its subject, you can help by expanding it (select the "Edit this page" link).

The phrases in brackets are optional. Note also that this wording eliminates the word Wikipedia, to better conform with Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. Discuss. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 22:46, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)

I like the re-wording, especially the "know or can find out more information" idea. How would this be changed, as it seems like the template is still protected? --Vishahu 19:13, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)

Movie stubs

There are three different stub templates for movies: template:movie-stub, template:mov-stub, template:film-stub. If no-one objects violently, I will start using the first in preference to the latter two. --Phil | Talk 08:57, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)

It seems rather illogical and inconsistent to have movie redirect to film but then template:film-stub redirect to template:movie-stub. RedWolf 03:30, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)

The category referenced is Category:movie stubs, which is probably why I picked that one; I think it also had the greatest usage. It made no sense to have three templates doing the same thing but after this much delay I cannot recall my exact reasoning. If you want to take on the work of switching all the affected articles over to your new choice, be my guest. Are you also going to rename the category? --Phil | Talk 12:56, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

Format request

Could someone with the clout to do it put a <BR> before the text of this template? It would improve the appearance of thousands (alas) of pages! — Bill 22:49, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Please, don't! This was done to template:bio-stub and it opens up a huge dead-space above the rubric. The DIV provides a line break already: any further formatting should be left to personal stylesheets. --Phil | Talk 10:54, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

Bill had added this previously to geo-stub where it was reverted by Delirium. I don't like the extraneous space either -- although it may be another glitch in rendering by my Firefox. --Joy [shallot] 12:19, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Apologies — sincere — for having done this again today; I only thought that I might have done it before, thus to check the history, then the various talk pages. I'll go revert my latest, but would someone explain where the Wikipedia personal stylesheets are? This isn't anything I've found onboard yet. — Bill 23:29, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Aha, see below: Cologne Blue may be the culprit. — Bill 23:54, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Two links to the same place?

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Does the message really need two links to the same page ("stub" and "help") in its two-sentence length? 65.116.19.243 19:22, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yes, that way it's more likely that both people who like nouns and people who like verbs will click through and read the manual. (Originally it was two different pages for those two links but they're merged nowadays.) --Joy [shallot] 08:21, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Cologne Blue

Would some fix the template so that it looks reasonable in Cologne Blue? The current format (from 23:27, 2004 Sep 30) glues the message to the last line of the article text. Thanks -- User:Docu

Second the motion, see "Format Request" above. — Bill 23:55, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Adding an icon?

How do people feel about adding an icon to the template, like Wikipedias in most other languages have? (see German, French, Polish and Estonian for different examples) I personally like the Polish version, although the German one is pretty cool as well. --Aramգուտանգ 01:33, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I don't like anything that makes the stub message stand out more than the article. Dori | Talk 02:21, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

I don't think the Polish stub deters from the article, plus it gived nice vertical padding to the stub message and makes it obvious that the message is not part of the article text, but instead a sort of "system message/footnote". In addition to that, the symbolism of the puzzle piece icon is simply perfect. Let's see what others think. --Aramգուտանգ 06:25, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I like it. although I'm torn between the simplicity of the Polish version and the efficiency of the German ;-) --Phil | Talk 09:39, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

I'd support an icon if it was tasteful. The Polish one is absolutely wonderful for the reasons Aram stated. —siro χ o 10:52, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

I support the usage of an icon common to all Wikipedias. Navigation, login, preferences, special pages are placed at the same position in all languages. This is why you can login, talk and edit everywhere. A common icon would help you to identify stubs in languages and alphabets you are not familiar. Gangleri 21:30, 2004 Oct 26 (UTC)

This Meta Template is becoming popular for Stubs. See Template:UK-stub, among others.

Template:MetaPicstub = {{Metapicstub | id=stub | image=Uk flag large.png | size=30 | alt=U.K. flag | article=[[United Kingdom|UK]]-related article | category=United Kingdom-related}}

For {{stub}} it could give...

{{Metapicstub | id=stub | image=Wiki letter w.svg | size=30 | alt=WikiStub | article=article | category=Stubs}}

Seabhcán 22:56, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I updated the format of this stub to use the "new" format, although I copied and pasted instead of implementing the template directly because we don't need a category in this main stub. I used the image Image:Wiki letter w.svg as the icon (same as pl and ru use). If I've done bad, I apologize. – Clockwork Soul 01:18, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I like it a lot. Let's see what others thing. :) --Sketchee 08:06, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)

I would have rather you not have (it invalidates cache and so and so), but now that it's been done, I guess it shouldn't be too bad. Probably will help people from other language wikis. --Ambush Commander 03:22, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)

Breaking up the category

I have found that even the stub categories are getting large and unwieldy. So here is my suggested example, used in this case for simple stub, though it can be applied to any other category of stub:

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

[[:Category:Stubs beginning with {{{1}}}|{{{2}}}]]

In this example, {{{1}}} is the first letter of the title and {{{2}}} is the second letter of the title. That way, the stubs can still be broken into categories, they won't all be listed under the same letter.

•→Iñgólemo ←• 04:14, 2004 Oct 26 (UTC)

Breaking up Stubs is a good idea, but it may be more useful to break it up by topic — see Category:Stub categories — and guide the templates into the categories in such a way that people interested and knowledgeable in some particular field will be given a list of pages needing improvement: along the lines of {{bio-stub}} and {{geo-stub}}, except sharper. I've been adding {{Italy-related}}. BUT the system (yours or mine) will only work if everyone puts the sharper stub markers on the page rather just plain {{stub}}; and right now, even {{bio-stub}} and {{geo-stub}} are not that widely used, let alone the sharper ones that already exist. — Bill 12:21, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What about having the ability to specify the category where the stub should be inserted between the {{stub|...}}? Normaly [[Category:...]] should be at the end of the page but they are not. With many InterWiki links you may oversee such stub categories when reworking the article.
Or another suggestion: I think a great help would be to to create automaticaly somthing as [[Category:This category\Stubs]]. I have seen articles belonging to six categories and more. The suggestion does not require much changes exept reloading of the cache. But because it is a feature which was not available until now nobody would expect that it should work imediatly. Regards Gangleri 21:58, 2004 Oct 26 (UTC)

"select the "Edit this page" link"

Do we really need to tack on:

(select the "Edit this page" link)

to random stub messages? Isn't the link of the text "expanding it" enough? (Do we really want people who aren't acquainted with this concept of "clicking" on "links" to edit an encyclopedia?)

In any event, it should be consistent. Only some have this. --Joy [shallot] 19:41, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I think it's bloated and unnecessary. The "expand it" link already does that. --[[User:AllyUnion|AllyUnion (talk)]] 10:04, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Auto-stub

According to Template talk:Auto-stub, we should remove this stub from all articles that it appears on, and never add it to any articles. Is this correct? Should the mention of this kind of stub above be fixed?

Brianjd 08:03, 2004 Nov 13 (UTC)

By "the mention above" I mean the line in the table in the first section, "Categories".

Makes no sense to me. I see no justification or discussion of this. It's an unsigned comment posted by user:OldakQuill, you should ask there. Personally, I'd be tempted to ignore it as is. --ssd

Bug

why does this display incorrectly, Card_magic? [[User:BrokenSegue|BrokenSegue]] 05:03, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

A bug indeed. Missing right bracket on last external link. Fixed. Thanks for pointing it out. --ssd 05:54, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Layout fix?

How about adding horizontal lines and center-align the text line? Like this:

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Does it look better? // Solkoll 14:31, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It does, but I rather have the stub notice not that blaringly obvious. -- AllyUnion (talk) 18:51, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

----

I think articles would look much better if stubs (and other wiki messages) were separated from the main content of an article via ----. I've done this on my installation of MediaWiki and it does look better! Adraeus 13:14, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"Don't use this template"

So I think WP:CFD has decided that this category is too large. In order for people to still be able to find stubs using the category mechanism, and to help them find stubs of interest to them, it looks like what we need to do is re-tag all the articles currently using this template (see Category:Stub) with a by-topic tag (see Wikipedia:Stub categories). Part of the transition process will also involve people not adding more articles to the pile. So I'm thinking it might be beneficial to add a note to this template that says something like, "This template is being discontinued. Please re-tag this article with a topic-specific stub tag." -- Beland 01:35, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No way. We don't make things worse, we make them better. If you want to continue removing the old stub message it's fine, but don't mess up all the articles that use it. Readers don't care about the category. Dori | Talk 02:09, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)

This is not a new situation, and this was not recently decided on WP:CFD. This category is discouraged from use. But I think renaming it or deleting it is stupid. There's too many articles here to delete it, and I don't think they'll all be recategorized anytime soon, and worse, there will always be articles that don't fit anywhere else. Also, I can't think of anything much worse than lengthening the stub message. *shudder* --ssd 15:18, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

...not to mention changing this template invalidates the cache on thousands of pages, causing undue strain on the databases, et cetera et cetera. Rdsmith4— Dan | Talk 15:26, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The current concensus on WP:CFD is unanimous (5/6 at this writing) (except for the nominator) in keeping this as is at least until it is empty, and emptying should occur by moving articles to topical stubs (or obviously, by fixing them). Even Beland admits this could be a very slow process. I think saying this template is being discontinued is an exaggeration. --ssd 15:42, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't think this template or category should ever completely go away. Reason being that many editors (myself included) simply will not be able or willing to keep track of all the various stub templates. Use of this template should be deprecated, but faced with the alternatives of using this generic stub tag or simply not tagging a stub at all because one can't be bothered to look up a more specific tag, I think it would be preferable to have the generic tag applied to be sorted out later by those more familiar with the organization of stub templates. I see it as comparable to categories, where a casual editor may add an article to a high-level category and it will eventually get sorted out to a more specific category. older≠wiser 16:31, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Couldn't agree with you more. The only other stub message I remember is bio-stub. I'm unlikely to memorize the other stub message as the whole process seems useless to me. Dori | Talk 22:14, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

First of all, I had no idea that people were trying to categorize stubs and the old {{stub}} was discouraged. Either I'm clueless, or there are a lot of other people out there still adding the stub message to articles (as I just did a few minutes ago, I am now changing it to a redirect). Furthermore, the syntax for the cat-stubs is confusing. Is it Bio stub? Or Irish Country Stub? Is there a stub template page??? Confused now... Ambush Commander 03:33, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)

No server response...

I attempted to make some changed to this template, but every time I tried I got sent an error page. The current version has the text too close to the image, and whacky HTML that could mess up some browsers. So, could an admin please edit the template to read this:?

_{<div class="boilerplate metadata" id="stub"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="5" style="background-color: transparent;"><tr><td>[[Image:Wiki letter w.svg|48px|Wiki letter w]]</td><td>''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Perfect stub article|stub]]. You can [[Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub|help]] Wikipedia by [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]''.</td></tr></table></div>}

Thanks! ✏ OvenFresh ☺ 01:07, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That div is redundant, you can put the class and id on the table itself. The background color is also unnecessary since {{stub}} is only used in the article namespace. Goplat 01:17, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I didn't add a div. The only changes is that I defined the variables (something="var"), made some HTML lowercase (for XHTML), and increased the cellspacing a bit to make the image further away from the text... ✏ OvenFresh ☺ 22:31, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Nevermind, JRM fulfilled my request. :) ✏ OvenFresh ☺ 22:58, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Can we put the template back into the category now?

Now that only 200 articles are loaded at a time, can we put stubs back into Category:Stub, or is it still too much for the servers? -Aranel ("Sarah") 23:35, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Placement?

One thing I'm not sure about: where exactly should the stub message be placed? I seem to remember hearing that it should go after the main article body, but before sections like External links. However, I can't seem to find where I read that. What do you guys think? Jason One 23:45, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Definitely at the bottom. The standard order seems to be* as follows:

cleanup messages/disambiguation template
Article (including external links)
"related article"-style templates
stub template
categories
transwiki links

(*I say "seems to be" because I've never seen it written anywhere - this is simply the way most articles seem to be ordered) Grutness|^hello?

10:59, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Category / format

I'd like to remove the category from the template. Such a thing is a big hit on the servers. I'd also like to reduce the code overall, by removing the table tags.

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Feedback? -- Netoholic @ 17:53, 2005 Feb 11 (UTC)

Is it really "a bit hit on the servers"? My understanding was that the 200-articles-at-a-time limit was designed to avoid this problem. -Aranel ("Sarah") 23:17, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The change in the code looks good to me, but I will admit that I am not an expert on HTML or Wiki code.

Old version:

<div class="boilerplate metadata" id="stub"><table cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" style="background-color: transparent;"><tr><td>[[Image:Wiki letter w.svg|48px| ]]</td><td>''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Perfect stub article|stub]]. You can [[Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub|help]] Wikipedia by [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]''.</td></tr></table></div>[[:Category:Stub]] {{stub}} Netoholic's new version:

<div class="boilerplate metadata" id="stub" style="white-space: nowrap;">[[Image:Wiki letter w.svg|48px| ]] ''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Perfect stub article|stub]]. You can [[Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub|help]] Wikipedia by [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]''.</div>

The stub category should also be removed from the template code. I counted 3,999 articles in Category:Stub before the software quit listing articles at Susan Weber Soros. Although a few people have been going through and coverting stubs into topic stubs, there haven't been enough stubs converted to reduce the number of stub articles to a reasonable amount. The developer User:Jamesday has said the goal is to have a category preferably below 500, but at least under 1,000 articles. The problem is that a large number of the articles that have the stub template are not in the stub category because that was removed from the template code quite awhile ago. If you do a Google site-search on "This article is a stub" [1] you will see that the true number of articles with the stub template is "about 21,300". BlankVerse ∅ 14:38, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The 3,999 is only the tip of the iceberg. A serious dent does seem to be being made in Category:Stub (the fact that the first 200 articles in it go up to G alphabetically is sone indication. But it does look and feel a bit like bailing out the Titanic - everytime a couple of hundred are removed, a load of the "hidden" stubs appear in the category.

As far as putting the category back, might I suggest a simple solution? Make a new, second stub category Category:Stub(2), with a slightly altered template. Hopefully by the time that gets full, the first stub category will be empty enough that articles can start to fill that again. By having two parallel stub categories, the servers will be under less strain and the stub-sorters will start to think that we are making real progress because the category will start to go down in size. It will also mean that stubs will be where they should be (in the stub categories), rather than free-floating and largely untraceable! Grutness|^hello?

11:09, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

While a good idea in theory, my experience with users is that it will see inconsistent use, if any use at all; the result will be no net change in server workload, but a net increase in our own headaches... – Clockwork Soul 15:40, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and btw my vote would be to simplify the template if that will help, but if possible keep the category on it (category:Stub currently contains 4703 items, BTW, but page one now goes up to J) Grutness|^hello? 00:44, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Even after the category is removed, articles will still "linger" in the category until they are edited next (somewhat of a bug/feature). Stubs to be sorted in the future can be found also by using the Whatlinkshere link. -- Netoholic @ 16:32, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)

The problem with that is that "what links here" only lists 500 articles. Some of those 500 will probably not fit into any of the existing categories, so eventually it will become less and less useful.

What if we remove the category until we get it sorted down to a manageable size? Then we can add it again until it gets pretty full, and repeat the process. This might be a way for us to at least be able to see that we are making progress. -Aranel ("Sarah") 17:50, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I seriously doubt that there is any article which is not covered by one of the more topical stub messages. -- Netoholic @ 18:04, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)

There are some articles that have stayed on the first page of the stub category for weeks because no one has been able to figure out what to do with them. What do you do with Collaboration, Commercialism, Folk culture, Conventional wisdom, Education in North Korea, Grave (burial), Intermarriage, Hotel bar, and Humanitarianism? Some of these could theoretically go in existing categories, but their connection to that category would be so vague or broad that it wouldn't be any real improvement over leaving them as generic stubs.

There are also some stub articles that are on such specialized topics that until someone who happens to know about that subject finds them, they tend not to be sorted or expanded. -Aranel ("Sarah") 18:20, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

class="... plainlinks"

I think that the class spec. should include plainlinks, so the template would then appear as:

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Comments? (note, I'm trying to get the spacing issue resolved at MediaWiki talk:Monobook.css) – AB CD 03:22, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Add the usual id="stub":

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Patrick 02:04, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

I know that, but I removed it to allow those with #stub {display: none;}, etc. to see the modifications. – AB CD 03:21, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

If no one has any objections, I will be bold and edit it sometime after 00:01, 27 February 2005 (UTC). – AB CD 03:25, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I actually very much prefer the arrow. To a new user it (rightly so) implies "clieck here to take action". Plain links imply "click here for more information". I remember that was my impression when I first saw the notice. -- Netoholic @ 04:25, 2005 Feb 26 (UTC)

Well, since there appears to be a good reason for it, it will stay. – AB CD 02:32, 27 February 2005 (UTC)

a painless way of simplifying the template

The template coulkd be simplified (hopefully with at least a little reduction in server strain) quite simply by the following method: 1) Merge the pages Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub and Wikipedia:Perfect stub article into one article (there is a lot of overlap anyway) or at the very least put links between them. 2) Change the template message to:

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it

It may only help a little, but any help might, erm, help. Grutness|^hello? 11:04, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Please reserve underlining for links.--Patrick 02:06, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

The underlining is unnecessary (and, for the purposes of my suggestion, an irrelevance). It could be bolded, or plain text. The point is that the number of links on the template is reduced by 20% (leaving the edit function, the picture, the stub category, and only one other link). Surely this will help the servers, no? Grutness|^hello? 08:06, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Better still, as suggested above, we don't really need the edit function tied to the stub template - it's on the page menu anyway. All we need, then, is:

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it

...and we've got a 40% reduction in links - one page, one picture, and one category. Wouldn't that help? Grutness|^hello? 12:26, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Removal of category-again

Wqhat is going on? Category: stub is at its lowest level for months, well below the level that people were talking about the category should be on, and someone comes along and takes it off. I've put it back on, and would like to know why it was removed. If there was a good reason not mentioned here (or mentioned here and hidden in the length of this page somewhere), then I will accept that it shouldn't be there, but right now it seems very strange that it's been removed! Grutness|^hello? 09:46, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's day has passed. You seem to be the only advocate for the category on this page for weeks. The category is still there with most articles (until they are next edited, plus you can use Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Stub to find articles to sort. -- Netoholic @ 18:57, 2005 Mar 10 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but that's not how I read the conversation. You are advocating to have the category removed. The rest of us would like to retain it. -Aranel ("Sarah") 19:27, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

What Aranel said... --Joy [shallot]

Addition by Eleassar777

Is it really necessary or desirable? Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 22:31, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that it is. It clutters up an otherwise simple statement with too much information, which is available directly from the already-linked Wikipedia:Perfect stub article page. – Clockwork Soul 22:35, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Template talk:Stub/Archive 3

Contents

NOTICE: New type of stub

Paragraphing stub message

Adding a div to allow user css to override stub display

Random edits to the template

Typo?

Keep the stub and substub messages?

Unprotect

Category

New stubs

Big mistake, sorry

Invalid HTML

Ditch the arrow

Metastub

Proposed rewording

Movie stubs

Format request

Two links to the same place?

Cologne Blue

Adding an icon?

Breaking up the category

"select the "Edit this page" link"

Auto-stub

Bug

Layout fix?

----

"Don't use this template"

No server response...

Can we put the template back into the category now?

Placement?

Category / format

class="... plainlinks"

a painless way of simplifying the template

Category

Removal of category-again

Addition by Eleassar777