I don't like it centered, maybe it could be distinguished from the rest of the article by putting a little box effect on it? - Stoph 03:40, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've protected the template - there have been numerous small - and largely unneccessary - changes to it in recent times, as well as some vandalism, and since this is such a heavily-used template, each change puts undue stress on the servers. I have no objection to people making neccessary changes to the template, but would request that any changed are discussed here on the talk page first. That way there's less risk of trivial changes or reverts. Grutness... wha? 02:30, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
I apologize for the long title, but to cut the message short, here's what it should be.
I'm not going to mess with the coding or the linking, since there's others that can easily do that. Tell me what you think. MessedRocker 21:41, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)
I disagree with the changes to the template's appearance as well as to its wording. The fewer gray boxes per page, the better (many articles are already bogged down with templates), and a simpler message (which matches all the other stub messages) is always preferable. — Dan | Talk 03:21, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
(Sorry, I wasn't sure where the best place to post this would be). I find that all of the stub template text tends to be placed very closely after the element before it, like a See also or External links section. I am wondering if I am the only one who believes that an extra bit of space above the stub message might be more aesthetically pleasing? func (talk) 01:58, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Every stub template has an image next to it. Except this one. This makes it look like the text is part of the article to newcomers. What possible reason would there be not to leave the image there? Elfguy 20:56, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
You've answered your own question. Stub templates are not meant to be "obvious". They're meant to be unobtrusive, so that the casual reader doesn't get the in his or her face. let's face it, it's fairly easy for a reade to see that an article is short. The main purpose of them is to link to a category. They give a small message to the reader, so that if they know more they know to add to the article, and they sort the stubs into categories where editors can find them. We're not trying to put a flashy neon sign there saying "YOOHOO! STUUUB!". Grutness... wha? 00:00, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I agreen whith Elfguy to purt an image on the stub like most odter stubs. Thank it is a good idea to put an sad face image on the stub. It symbolize that the article is sad because it is short compared to adder article, and Can fall victim of speeddy deletion. Perhaps adding som color to the stub. .** My Cat inn @ (talk)** 00:49, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
The many template authors or editors who are using icons in their templates are ignoring the official guideline. With many stubs now sporting multiple stub templates, because they fall into multiple stub categories, and with the icons, we are getting some very cluttered little stubs. Finell 06:26, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Why have editors started adding the line break to this template? I would like to see some examples of where the line-break-less version of {{ stub}} "breaks" an article, because I've never seen it. If it is only a few articles, then the line break should just be added manually above the template. On the other hand, if the line break really is necessary, then it should be added to all the stub templates. BlankVerse ∅ 11:06, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
<br> to <br />
, so it doesn't matter which is used in the wiki source. clear=all or clear:both have unforeseen effects also, sometimes pushing elements down the page and out of place. I guess we need to see examples of where the current stub template isn't working right. --
Netoholic
@ 7 July 2005 04:21 (UTC)
When license violators borrow our content without credit, the Wikpedia name in the stub notice can help maintain the authorship. Take this example [1]
lots of issues | leave me a message 21:38, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
If we wanted to "maintain authorship", adding "Wikipedia" to the {{ stub}} template is the wrong way to do that because the stub notice appears on so few pages, especially since the Stub-sorting WikiProject regularly replaces the generic stub template with more specific topic stub templates. But as User:Violetriga has pointed out, it is Wikipedia policy to avoid self-references, so even that point doesn't really matter. BlankVerse ∅ 11:10, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
What is wrong with the stub WikiProject link? It is much better to categorise stubs than to have generic ones. I mean, you don't lose anything in the process. Currently, it seems as though the majority of stubs that I land on are categorised, which is a good thing. Probably due to the WikiProject link in the first place.
I'd agree with Rdsmith here - for two reasons. Firstly, although anyone can stub sort, considering the bewildering number of stub categories it's not the sort of thing that a casual Wiipedia reader is likely to get the hang of quickly. Secondly, if they're interested enough to help, the template links to Wikipedia:Stub anyway, which gives lots of details about the WikiProject. Grutness... wha? 05:54, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
I disagree. Editors need to know what type article it is, and what exactly is needed. If I were to go on a page and see that it is a stub, I might just leave it. However, if the stub makes it clear that its about a person, or a music related article, then I might just dive in if I was interested in pop culture. A stub is easy to sort, I dont think it confuses the reader.
The guideline page for stub messages prescribes saying "help Wikipedia," not just "help." I agree with the guideline. When I come across stub messages that just say, "You can help by," my mind involuntarily asks, "Help whom?" Saying "You can help Wikipedia by" is more concrete and invites community participation. Also, notwithstanding deprecation, authors and editors are still using this stub (or others like it). Therefore, stub messages should be edited to conform to the guideline, in my opinion. The only reason I did not make this edit myself, which was my original intent, is that I saw on this Talk page that the issue is in debate. Finell 19:21, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
While I commend the efforts and results of the stub sorting project, the project is not finished, so there are many stubs that cannot yet be categorized. Once the project is finished, there will still be new stubs created that do not fit an existing category. Therefore, there is now and will continue to be a need for the humble generic stub template. That being so, the text of the stub template should not, in my opinion, include the deprecation message, as it now does. I have not mastered the Wiki markup language, but perhaps there is a way of displaying a comment on the template page that recommends trying to find a categorized stub template before resorting to this one, but without including the deprecation message in the template's displayed text. Finell 06:37, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Why is that necessary? Seems useless to me. We don't explain other wiki markup; why this? — Dan | Talk 14:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Is it possible to add, between the <noinclude>
and the </noinclude>
tags, the following text:
[[es:Plantilla:Esbozo]]
? If yes, thanks in advance. -- 84.42.146.44 18:30, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
I and a couple other users ( User:Sannse and User:Banes) were just discussing the problems that come with the millions of stub templates. Importantly, one article is often covered by several templates ( Bill Whelan) which is certainly not too aesthetically appealing.
Would it not be possible to use optional parameters in this template to give it more purpose? Eventually it would be possible to replace the templates on Bill Whelan with {{stub|Irish biographical|composer|keyboardist}} producing:
The article would be appropriately placed into the three stub categories also. Anyone got any thoughts on this? I am not suggesting we should ban the myriad other templates that are available, I am just tryingto make this particular one more useful - giving users another option. It would save time trying to find the right template, at least. -- Oldak Quill 11:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
I have a proposal on new stub-templates. These consists not only of a text line, instead uses a big colored signboard. These is more visuable, and may not be mixed together with the text, which our current version does. (the design is inspired of swedish Wikipedia's old stub-version). This message is interpreted text and is because not entirely correct spelled.
My proposal:
![]() |
This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
Looks this good? --
Off!
21:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Please add [zh:Template:stub] in it. 百家姓之四 12:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Please remove [[de:Vorlage:Stub]] -- Igge 17:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Please add interwiki links to he: and yi: Redaktor 23:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Some article that bear the "stub" template are very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very long.
What would be the most efficient systematic way to find those. How long is the longest article thus (mis)identified as a stub? Michael Hardy 02:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Please add an interwiki link to the Vietnamese version of this template:
[[vi:Tiêu bản:Sơ khai]]
Thanks.
– Minh Nguyễn ( talk, contribs) 04:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Why does both "help" and "stub" refer to Wikipedia:Stub? → A z a Toth 02:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
When I was a small child I read a 7 part finnish encyclopaedia numerous times through from cover to cover (Combi). 1 part was (with very few exceptions) what we would call stubs; the six other volumes consisting of fuller illustrated articles. The Micropaedia portion of Encyclopedia Britannica, is one half stubs (or substubs), and one half very short articles, by our standards. But they don't call them stubs, they call the books Micropaedia - Ready Reference and Index.
Wikipedia has treasured its informality, and will rightly continue to treasure it. And further, there was a time when it was essential to be very humble about the way we spoke about ourselves, to deflect criticisms of hubris. This part of our informal nature no longer has a reasonable basis. While we clearly are not yet winning our friendly competition to be the largest, the most comprehensive, the most reliable compendius information source of distilled verifiable information that collects human knowledge into a readable form; we are at least realistically struggling toward that aim on a credibly competitive level with the best of our rivals.
There is a real sea-change going on in the perception of wikipedia (including on one hand a decrying of the death of wikipedia as a concept). There is a gradual (and long in the waiting) shift towards emphasizing standards and quality over quantity. And even more importantly a real pride of what we are as opposed to what used to be a hopeful confidence about what we can become.
For all of the reasons enumerated above, I will seriously evaluate we are grievously selling ourselves short (ahem), by calling our briefest articles with the denigrating term "stub". This would be a powerful expression of our raised level of self-esteem, and possibly might even reduce the opportunities for sneering comments about having such an amount of short articles. </smirk>
I am not suggesting that we should stop calling them stubs in our internal deliberations. That would be stupid, and totally against any reasonable evaluation of human nature. We should even keep the name of the tag {stub}. What I am suggesting, is that we change the text displayed to casual readers of our content, to reflect that we are not genuinely ashamed of brief articles. Not only should the term "stub" be removed, but the whole template should lose the imperative mode, and claim that expansion will happen in the future tense. To me the question of what should replace the term "stub" is largely irrelevant, but I could see "ready reference article", "brief article", "information in brief" for instance as being hugely preferable. Do please give the matter serious and thoughtful consideration before rejecting it out of hand, thank you. -- Cimon avaro; on a pogostick. 00:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
We're familiar with the term stub. We should not allow that familiarity to cloud the fact that outsiders are not familiar with our terminology. We should be as accessible as possible, and making up our own words isn't helping. (Disambiguation is an actual word, incidentally, and fairly easy to understand from its components, but perhaps a more obvious term could be found for that too.) — Simetrical ( talk • contribs) 07:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I see the point - and I would have no objection to the wording of stub templates being changed to indicate "this article is a stub - i.e., it is incomplete. Blah blah blah..." I don't see any reason why the template and category names should be changed though. It should be noted thought that stub articles are not "ready reference" articles, in that ready references in encyclopedias are summaries of complete articles mentioning all the important information from the full articles - stubs are articles with important information missing. Also, because of the way Wikipedia works, it is virtually impossible for an article to be truly complete. It is the peculiar nature of Wikipedia which means that there is really no exact synonym for "stub" in the non-Wiki world. Grutness... wha? 07:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
A couple of very important points are worth mentioning here - first, if there is to be wholesale change it should be done very carefully. many of these templates are used by vast numbers of articles, and as such changes to them can cause a great deal of distress to the servers (which is why a lot of them are protected). Second, no change should occur without getting input from the people who deal with stubs the most, WP:WSS, since a LOT of work has gone into maintaining the stub templates and trying to keep them as uniform as possible. Any wholesale changes that are made to stub templates without discussion there are likely to be swiftly reverted. As such, I've noted this discussion on the WP:WSS talk page and would ask that any moves to change the templates should be held off until after there has been input from some of the other regular stub-sorters. Grutness... wha? 08:38, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I feel fairly neutral about the "jargon" aspect; Pharos's suggestion seems fairly sensible, but as the text is linked to a defining document in either case, I doubt it makes much difference. It would make the text longer though, something we already gets gripes about in some cases. The original premise of changing it for "PR reasons" I'd be strongly opposed to; to tag stubs as "Micropaedia articles", and therefore brief by design would be a wholesole misresepresentation. The idea of changing the text to some bland passive-voice statement that the article "will be expanded", from its present active encouragement to expand it would also a step backward: rather than trying to bluster for the benefit of "casual readers", we should continue to go out of our way to encourage them to become more than that. Alai 16:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I like Pharos' suggestion a lot. As for server load, since this is one-time, it's a very minor concern; it will probably cause a slight hiccup when you edit the really heavily-used templates like {{
stub}}, but nothing to be worried about. An old notice on {{
qif}} said it caused database lock of just a few seconds, and I'm pretty sure that was used massively more than {{
stub}} (to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pages; I don't know about this). Server load for template changes is generally overstated. Current
Chief Technical Officer
Brion Vibber (who now was and is in charge of "maintain[sing] overall responsibility for all technical functions of the Foundation, including both hardware and software", although the post didn't exist at the time) has
said: "'Policy' shouldn't really concern itself with server load except in the most extreme of cases; keeping things tuned to provide what the user base needs is our job." —
Simetrical (
talk •
contribs)
04:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
As for the devs telling you to do anything, I see this (developer Jamesday says meta-templates should be dropped, saying nothing about isolated changes to the template, and this well over a year ago; Brion explicitly countermands him about a year later), this and this and this (Jamesday says categories should be dropped or cut down upon, saying nothing about isolated changes to the template, and this almost a year and a half ago; nobody seemingly asked other devs, but Brion later ended up countermanding similar statements of James), and this (Jamesday says images should be dropped, saying nothing about isolated changes to the templates; Brion explicitly countermands him shortly thereafter). In other words: none of these changes had anything to do with what we're discussing, namely isolated changes to the templates; all of them came from the same developer; and that developer was overruled by the one explicitly given responsibility for Wikimedia server performance. — Simetrical ( talk • contribs) 00:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
-- Jay Turner 18:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
This template appears to have a spurious extra line break the bottom. Which is not consistent with the other stub templates, so the layout gets mucked up a bit when a stub is sorted. Can someone please remove the line break? Thanks! GeorgeStepan e k\ talk 03:11, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
While we're considering changing all stubs (see #Renaming "stubs" to "Ready references".):
<div>
is unnecessary here. Use <p>
, since that's what it is.id="stub"
needs to be changed; it has to be a class
, not an id
, because some pages have more than one stub template and it's illegal (as well as pointless) to duplicate id
s.So the content part of the template should become
<p class="notice metadata stub">This article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]</span>.</p>
Then the line
.stub { font-style: italics; }
should be added to Mediawiki:Common.css. Similar changes, of course, must be made to all stub templates. — Simetrical ( talk • contribs) 04:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
This template can be made more universal by using {{ SITENAME}} instead of hardcoding "Wikipedia", e.g.
''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by ..
becomes
''This article is a [[{{ns:Project}}:Stub|stub]]. You can help {{SITENAME}} by ..
Pimlottc 15:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Please add
el:Πρότυπο:Επέκταση
in the interwiki section.
--
Anastasios
15:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Done and done. -- TheParanoidOne 17:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Can someone add the Arabic interwiki? Just in case, here it is:
ar:قالب:بذرة
--
Qasamaan 20:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Added. —
xaosflux
Talk
02:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Can someone help create the Stub for yo.wikipedia.org? -- Qasamaan 09:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
The transwiki link to Lojban page could be added to the page (jbo:Template:na_mulno). I guess some other "stub" links are missing, too. -- 82.139.47.118 10:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
bg:Шаблон:Мъниче Thanks.-- Петър Петров 16:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
That this template is uncategorised? --– Xoid 23:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
LOL. In fact, we are currently debating as to create a Category:Stub templates. If you think it is a good idea, please come and take part in the debate. Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 00:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Please copy and paste this new list of interwiki links. It adds af: az: be: cs: ko: la: lb: li: sr: fi: tl: uk: ur: vec:, updates bs: ca: ga: hr: id: ia: it: ku: lv: lt: hu: mi: ms: nn: oc: ru: sl: su: sv: tt: wa: and sorts the whole list according to english standards.
<!-- interwiki --> [[af:Sjabloon:Saadjie]] [[als:Vorlage:Stumpen]] [[ang:Template:Stycce]] [[ar:قالب:بذرة]] [[az:Şablon:Qaralama]] [[be-x-old:Шаблён:Накід]] [[bs:Šablon:U začetku]] [[bg:Шаблон:Мъниче]] [[ca:Plantilla:Esborrany]] [[cs:Šablona:Pahýl]] [[cy:Nodyn:Eginyn]] [[da:Skabelon:Stub]] [[el:Πρότυπο:Επέκταση]] [[es:Plantilla:Esbozo]] [[eo:Ŝablono:Ĝermo]] [[eu:Template:Zirriborroa]] [[fr:Modèle:Ébauche]] [[ga:Teimpléad:Stumpa]] [[gd:Template:Bun]] [[gl:Template:En progreso]] [[ko:틀:토막글]] [[ha:Template:Stub]] [[hsb:Předłoha:Stub]] [[hr:Predložak:Mrva]] [[id:Templat:Stub]] [[ia:Patrono:Pecietta]] [[is:Snið:Stubbur]] [[it:Template:S]] [[ku:Şablon:Kurt]] [[la:Formula:Stipula]] [[lv:Veidne:Stub]] [[lb:Template:Skizz]] [[lt:Šablonas:Stub]] [[li:Sjabloon:Sjtumpke]] [[jv:Cithakan:Stub]] [[jbo:Template:na mulno]] [[hu:Sablon:Csonk]] [[mk:Шаблон:Никулец]] [[mi:Template:Maramara]] [[ms:Templat:Stub]] [[nl:Sjabloon:Beg]] [[no:Mal:Stubb]] [[nn:Mal:Spire]] [[oc:Modèl:Esbòs]] [[pl:Szablon:Stub]] [[pt:Predefinição:Esboço]] [[ksh:Schablon:Stub]] [[ro:Format:Ciot]] [[ru:Шаблон:Заготовка]] [[scn:Template:Stub]] [[simple:Template:Stub]] [[sk:Šablóna:Výhonok]] [[sl:Predloga:Stub]] [[sr:Шаблон:Клица]] [[sh:Template:U začetku]] [[su:Citakan:Pondok]] [[fi:Malline:Tynkä]] [[sv:Mall:Stub]] [[tl:Template:Stub]] [[tt:Ürnäk:Töpçek]] [[th:แม่แบบ:โครง]] [[vi:Tiêu bản:Sơ khai]] [[tr:Şablon:Taslak]] [[uk:Шаблон:Доробити]] [[ur:سانچہ:نامکمل]] [[vec:Template:Stub]] [[wa:Modele:Djermon]] [[zh:Template:Stub]] [[zh-yue:Template:楔]]
I could have written down only the changes, but it was much faster for me as it will be for you just to copy and paste the whole list. Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 09:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
An update has been made to the above list. Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 20:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Another update has been made. By the way, why hasn't this template been given a /doc page such as with Template:En icon? It would make the interwiki updates much easier, wouldn't it? Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 03:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Please add th:แม่แบบ:โครง into the list of interwiki languages. Thanks -- Jutiphan 22:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I think that the stub should have an optional param so that you format it like {{stub|cat}} that way we do not have to create a new template for each category. Sample at {{ stubc}} Comperr 02:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Also, it would mean one template on 400,000 pages. Which would cause so much strain on the servers that we probably wouldn't have a working Wikipedia any more. Not to mention the problem with slight variants on piping used meaning that virtaully identical parallel stub types would start cropping up everywhere. Grutness... wha? 00:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
{{
tl}}
springs to mind) –
Gurch
17:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)After concerns raised at WP talk:Stub about the complexity of WP:STUB, I have written a rough draft to shorten it. The new draft contains the same information, but is 25% shorter. It also removes some of the information on how to create stub templates - information which is in part responsible for the large number of "discoveries" and is also responsible (due to the misreading by some editors) of the need to trawl the non-existent Category:B stubs for stubs "about A". Please feel free to make any comments, positive or negative on my new draft ( User:Grutness/WP Stub rewrite (draft) at its talk page. (crossposted to WP talk:Stub and WP talk:WSS) Grutness... wha? 00:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
example:
....
{{ editprotected}}
Can someone change this for me since it is protected?
The current template reads:
<div class="notice metadata" id="stub">''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]. ''</div><includeonly>[[Category:Stubs]]</includeonly>
I wanted to change it to:
<div class="notice metadata" id="stub">''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]</span>.''</div><includeonly>[[Category:Stubs]]</includeonly>
The only thing it would do is make the text expanding it appear as a plain link rather than an external link. — The Future 04:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I suggest that the stub template assert that contributions must be GFDL licensed; perhaps something like
thank you for considering this. Crimethinker 21:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I see your point, Crimethinker, but we also have to consider that some editors resent even having the stub templates at all, and these templates would only become more dominating if we include large chuncks of text. This problem is in turn increased when some articles use more than one stub template. The GFDL reminder really applies to all articles, not only stub articles. Just my 2 cents. Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 13:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
I propose that a few parameters be added to this template to allow for standardization of the stub templates. Rather than having haphazard styling of stub templates, each stub template would just be a reference to Template:Stub. For example, the contents of {{ australia-bcast-stub}} could become:
{{stub |id=[[Image:Wireless tower.svg|30px]] |kindofarticle=article related to [[broadcasting]] in [[Australia]] |category=Australia broadcasting stubs }}
This would produce:
![]() |
This article related to broadcasting in Australia is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
Even so, {{ stub}} would still display a generic stub notice:
![]() |
This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
Changing to this templated system would allow for easily creating and modifying stub types and ensuring consistent styling among all stub templates. For example, it would make sure that the "expanding it" link is a plain link (in other words, does not display the external link symbol).
The new template code would be like this:
{| class="boilerplate metadata" id="stub" style="background-color:transparent" | style="padding-right:0.5em; {{{idstyle|}}}" | {{{id|[[Image:Wiki letter w.svg|30px]]}}} || ''This {{{kindofarticle|article}}} is a [[Wikipedia:Perfect stub article|stub]]. You can [[Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub|help]] Wikipedia by <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]</span>''. |} [[Category:{{{category|Stubs}}}]]<noinclude> {{/doc}}</noinclude>
— Remember the dot ( talk) 19:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
{{stub |id=[[Image:Wireless tower.svg|30px]] |kindofarticle=article related to [[broadcasting]] in [[Australia]] |category=Australia broadcasting stubs }}
Please wait until there is consensus before adding editprotected tags. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 23:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Monthly Period
Pre-MS Symptoms Cycle Post-MS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.153.221.219 ( talk) 13:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Um... thanks for contributing to Wikipedia? Terraxos ( talk) 02:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC) Just a note, stub type proposals go on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals. -- 98.114.243.75 ( talk) 23:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}} Add an Image. Preview:
BL Rochester, AKA Brian L. Rochester, is the author of The Joey Jenkins Mysteries. The Joey Jenkins Mystery Series is a series of childrens books for school aged boys, ranging from 9 - 12 years old.
"The Mystery at Camp Davis" 2004 - ISBN: 1-4137-7528-4
As school is nearing the end, Joey Jenkins and his friends are getting ready for a return visit to summer camp at Camp Davis. But, the gang meets a new camper this year, and Mr. Davis's prize winning Calico Goat named Billy Bear is missing. With the help of an expert animal tracker named Tommy Clearwater, will the bunch be able to find Billy Bear in time for the county fair? Will they find out how he disappeared? Read along as Joey and friends investigate “The Mystery at Camp Davis”.
"Something is Missing at Redding Lake" 2005 - ISBN: 1-4241-0065-8
Grandma and Grandpa’s house has a secret. It also has a really tall tale. For Joey Jenkins, Thanksgiving Vacation means that he’s in the middle of another mystery. Will he find out what’s kept Grandpa searching for so long? Will Brooke convince Aunt Lauren of the truth? And, will Thomas finally face that bully? Come along and discover what’s missing at Redding Lake, as Joey and family solve another Joey Jenkins Mystery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.195.208.239 ( talk) 02:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
Please add an interwiki link to the Japanese version of this template: [[ja:Template:Stub]]
Thanks. -- Nightshadow28 ( talk) 03:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Out of interest, is there any reason stub templates look the way they do and appear at the bottom of the article rather than other templates like Template:Wikify? I'm not proposing anything, just wondering if there's been any discussion on this. For example, see User:Alex.muller/draft. — alex.muller ( talk • edits) 22:20, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, both the style and location of stub templates has been discussed in the past, and they are both as they are for good reasons. As far as the box is concerned, a stub template is meant to be unobtrusive (it should be obvious to the reader that an article is a stub). Similarly with the location - we don't want the template to get in the way of reading the article, since it's a note to an editor rather than a reader. In many ways, it would make some sense if other editor-related templates (e.g., {{ wikify}}) wewre put at the bottom, too, leaving only content related ones like {{ hoax}} at the top, but stub templates c ertainly should go at the bottom of the articles. Grutness... wha? 23:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I notice this template isn't categorized. Shouldn't it be?-- Kotniski ( talk) 11:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I'll take this opportunity to draw stub boffs' attention to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Stub category policy concerning the possible hiding of stub categories. I will also have a related proposal to include a link to the stub category in the stub notice (template) itself, but I'm not sure what's the best place to bring it up (here? project page?)-- Kotniski ( talk) 12:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Well to be precise, the proposal is to move towards stub messages which look like this (subst'ed from User:Kotniski/metastub):
This would make the category more obviously accessible, while allowing it to be harmlessly hidden (from the Categories box) as proposed in the above-mentioned discussion.-- Kotniski ( talk) 15:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
The categories would still appear normally in the template code, of course, and anyone wishing to see them displayed in the categories section of articles as they are now need only select "show hidden categories" under "my preferences". -- Kotniski ( talk) 07:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Please add de:Vorlage:Lückenhaft. — Guy Peters Talk • Contributions • Edit counter 09:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
A noinclude link to Category:Stub categories may be a good idea. 78.34.128.1 ( talk) 05:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I know it's a big project, I've done similar sized mergers myself, but why not merge all the varieties of stubs into one template? It would make it much more convenient for editors, and I even thought out the code! It might go a little something like this:
{{#SWITCH: {{{1|{{{category|}}}))) |#default=''This{{#ifeq: {{{1{{{category|}}})))||| [[{{{1{{{category}}})))]]-related}} article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]. ''</div>[[Category:{{#ifeq: {{{1{{{category|}}})))|||{{{1{{{category}}}))) }}Stubs]]<br> |1900s novel={{1900s novel stubs}}<br> |1910s novel={{1910s novel stubs}}<br> |1920s comedy film={{1920s comedy film stubs}}<br> |1920s novel={{1920s novel stubs}}<br> <br> ...<br> <br> |Zosteropidae={{Zosteropidae stubs}}<br> |Ząbkowice Śląskie County geography={{Ząbkowice Śląskie County geography stubs}}<br> }}
All it will take is the copy-pasting of |={{}}
5584 times and then copy-pasting the names, and this way, all the existing stub inclusion links will still work! Again, I know it seems daunting, but that's
what we did in Simpedia, and I know there is more help here!—
Supuhstar
*
§
23:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
''This{{#ifeq: {{{1{{{category|}}})))||| [[{{{1{{{category}}})))]]-related}} article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]. ''</div>[[Category:{{#ifeq: {{{1{{{category|}}})))|||{{{1{{{category}}}))) }}Stubs]]
The stub tag is only for articles, but it is often used in other namespaces (User: and now Wikipedia:). Could we add namespace detection to only include the category if the article is in the mainspace?
I believe the problem only exists for {{ stub}} itself, not the more specific stub templates. I think other than the day of the stub-bot's run, the stub cat usually has less than a hundred articles, and is often empty. Hence, I don't think there is a performance problem.
I've seen two or three users (persistently) tagging userspace drafts as stubs, and now there is WP:Stub example. Hence, I do think there is some actual need.
If the idea sounds good, here is what my {{
editprotected}} request would be:
If this sounds like a good idea, I'll ask for the editprotected. JackSchmidt ( talk) 16:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Why is this missing? -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 09:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I guess I don't quite understand the reversion of my most recent edit to this template, making it so Category:Stubs would only appear on mainspace pages. The reasoning was "we need to be able to find it elsewhere so that we can remove it" - First of all, we can use the "what links here" function to do that, and second of all, I don't really see the need to remove the stub template from, say, someone's userspace subpage with a draft article. The category being on such a page is more problematic, since the category is specifically meant for mainspace pages, not user or other namespace pages, so the category becomes polluted when these other namespace pages are included. Also, is anybody going to actually regularly go through and remove these pages if the category stays? I'm doubtful about that. I think we should revert back to my version. VegaDark ( talk) 16:14, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a gold lock showing that this page is protected? Jonathan321 ( talk) 01:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I don't like it centered, maybe it could be distinguished from the rest of the article by putting a little box effect on it? - Stoph 03:40, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've protected the template - there have been numerous small - and largely unneccessary - changes to it in recent times, as well as some vandalism, and since this is such a heavily-used template, each change puts undue stress on the servers. I have no objection to people making neccessary changes to the template, but would request that any changed are discussed here on the talk page first. That way there's less risk of trivial changes or reverts. Grutness... wha? 02:30, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
I apologize for the long title, but to cut the message short, here's what it should be.
I'm not going to mess with the coding or the linking, since there's others that can easily do that. Tell me what you think. MessedRocker 21:41, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)
I disagree with the changes to the template's appearance as well as to its wording. The fewer gray boxes per page, the better (many articles are already bogged down with templates), and a simpler message (which matches all the other stub messages) is always preferable. — Dan | Talk 03:21, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
(Sorry, I wasn't sure where the best place to post this would be). I find that all of the stub template text tends to be placed very closely after the element before it, like a See also or External links section. I am wondering if I am the only one who believes that an extra bit of space above the stub message might be more aesthetically pleasing? func (talk) 01:58, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Every stub template has an image next to it. Except this one. This makes it look like the text is part of the article to newcomers. What possible reason would there be not to leave the image there? Elfguy 20:56, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
You've answered your own question. Stub templates are not meant to be "obvious". They're meant to be unobtrusive, so that the casual reader doesn't get the in his or her face. let's face it, it's fairly easy for a reade to see that an article is short. The main purpose of them is to link to a category. They give a small message to the reader, so that if they know more they know to add to the article, and they sort the stubs into categories where editors can find them. We're not trying to put a flashy neon sign there saying "YOOHOO! STUUUB!". Grutness... wha? 00:00, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I agreen whith Elfguy to purt an image on the stub like most odter stubs. Thank it is a good idea to put an sad face image on the stub. It symbolize that the article is sad because it is short compared to adder article, and Can fall victim of speeddy deletion. Perhaps adding som color to the stub. .** My Cat inn @ (talk)** 00:49, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
The many template authors or editors who are using icons in their templates are ignoring the official guideline. With many stubs now sporting multiple stub templates, because they fall into multiple stub categories, and with the icons, we are getting some very cluttered little stubs. Finell 06:26, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Why have editors started adding the line break to this template? I would like to see some examples of where the line-break-less version of {{ stub}} "breaks" an article, because I've never seen it. If it is only a few articles, then the line break should just be added manually above the template. On the other hand, if the line break really is necessary, then it should be added to all the stub templates. BlankVerse ∅ 11:06, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
<br> to <br />
, so it doesn't matter which is used in the wiki source. clear=all or clear:both have unforeseen effects also, sometimes pushing elements down the page and out of place. I guess we need to see examples of where the current stub template isn't working right. --
Netoholic
@ 7 July 2005 04:21 (UTC)
When license violators borrow our content without credit, the Wikpedia name in the stub notice can help maintain the authorship. Take this example [1]
lots of issues | leave me a message 21:38, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
If we wanted to "maintain authorship", adding "Wikipedia" to the {{ stub}} template is the wrong way to do that because the stub notice appears on so few pages, especially since the Stub-sorting WikiProject regularly replaces the generic stub template with more specific topic stub templates. But as User:Violetriga has pointed out, it is Wikipedia policy to avoid self-references, so even that point doesn't really matter. BlankVerse ∅ 11:10, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
What is wrong with the stub WikiProject link? It is much better to categorise stubs than to have generic ones. I mean, you don't lose anything in the process. Currently, it seems as though the majority of stubs that I land on are categorised, which is a good thing. Probably due to the WikiProject link in the first place.
I'd agree with Rdsmith here - for two reasons. Firstly, although anyone can stub sort, considering the bewildering number of stub categories it's not the sort of thing that a casual Wiipedia reader is likely to get the hang of quickly. Secondly, if they're interested enough to help, the template links to Wikipedia:Stub anyway, which gives lots of details about the WikiProject. Grutness... wha? 05:54, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
I disagree. Editors need to know what type article it is, and what exactly is needed. If I were to go on a page and see that it is a stub, I might just leave it. However, if the stub makes it clear that its about a person, or a music related article, then I might just dive in if I was interested in pop culture. A stub is easy to sort, I dont think it confuses the reader.
The guideline page for stub messages prescribes saying "help Wikipedia," not just "help." I agree with the guideline. When I come across stub messages that just say, "You can help by," my mind involuntarily asks, "Help whom?" Saying "You can help Wikipedia by" is more concrete and invites community participation. Also, notwithstanding deprecation, authors and editors are still using this stub (or others like it). Therefore, stub messages should be edited to conform to the guideline, in my opinion. The only reason I did not make this edit myself, which was my original intent, is that I saw on this Talk page that the issue is in debate. Finell 19:21, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
While I commend the efforts and results of the stub sorting project, the project is not finished, so there are many stubs that cannot yet be categorized. Once the project is finished, there will still be new stubs created that do not fit an existing category. Therefore, there is now and will continue to be a need for the humble generic stub template. That being so, the text of the stub template should not, in my opinion, include the deprecation message, as it now does. I have not mastered the Wiki markup language, but perhaps there is a way of displaying a comment on the template page that recommends trying to find a categorized stub template before resorting to this one, but without including the deprecation message in the template's displayed text. Finell 06:37, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Why is that necessary? Seems useless to me. We don't explain other wiki markup; why this? — Dan | Talk 14:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Is it possible to add, between the <noinclude>
and the </noinclude>
tags, the following text:
[[es:Plantilla:Esbozo]]
? If yes, thanks in advance. -- 84.42.146.44 18:30, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
I and a couple other users ( User:Sannse and User:Banes) were just discussing the problems that come with the millions of stub templates. Importantly, one article is often covered by several templates ( Bill Whelan) which is certainly not too aesthetically appealing.
Would it not be possible to use optional parameters in this template to give it more purpose? Eventually it would be possible to replace the templates on Bill Whelan with {{stub|Irish biographical|composer|keyboardist}} producing:
The article would be appropriately placed into the three stub categories also. Anyone got any thoughts on this? I am not suggesting we should ban the myriad other templates that are available, I am just tryingto make this particular one more useful - giving users another option. It would save time trying to find the right template, at least. -- Oldak Quill 11:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
I have a proposal on new stub-templates. These consists not only of a text line, instead uses a big colored signboard. These is more visuable, and may not be mixed together with the text, which our current version does. (the design is inspired of swedish Wikipedia's old stub-version). This message is interpreted text and is because not entirely correct spelled.
My proposal:
![]() |
This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
Looks this good? --
Off!
21:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Please add [zh:Template:stub] in it. 百家姓之四 12:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Please remove [[de:Vorlage:Stub]] -- Igge 17:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Please add interwiki links to he: and yi: Redaktor 23:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Some article that bear the "stub" template are very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very long.
What would be the most efficient systematic way to find those. How long is the longest article thus (mis)identified as a stub? Michael Hardy 02:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Please add an interwiki link to the Vietnamese version of this template:
[[vi:Tiêu bản:Sơ khai]]
Thanks.
– Minh Nguyễn ( talk, contribs) 04:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Why does both "help" and "stub" refer to Wikipedia:Stub? → A z a Toth 02:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
When I was a small child I read a 7 part finnish encyclopaedia numerous times through from cover to cover (Combi). 1 part was (with very few exceptions) what we would call stubs; the six other volumes consisting of fuller illustrated articles. The Micropaedia portion of Encyclopedia Britannica, is one half stubs (or substubs), and one half very short articles, by our standards. But they don't call them stubs, they call the books Micropaedia - Ready Reference and Index.
Wikipedia has treasured its informality, and will rightly continue to treasure it. And further, there was a time when it was essential to be very humble about the way we spoke about ourselves, to deflect criticisms of hubris. This part of our informal nature no longer has a reasonable basis. While we clearly are not yet winning our friendly competition to be the largest, the most comprehensive, the most reliable compendius information source of distilled verifiable information that collects human knowledge into a readable form; we are at least realistically struggling toward that aim on a credibly competitive level with the best of our rivals.
There is a real sea-change going on in the perception of wikipedia (including on one hand a decrying of the death of wikipedia as a concept). There is a gradual (and long in the waiting) shift towards emphasizing standards and quality over quantity. And even more importantly a real pride of what we are as opposed to what used to be a hopeful confidence about what we can become.
For all of the reasons enumerated above, I will seriously evaluate we are grievously selling ourselves short (ahem), by calling our briefest articles with the denigrating term "stub". This would be a powerful expression of our raised level of self-esteem, and possibly might even reduce the opportunities for sneering comments about having such an amount of short articles. </smirk>
I am not suggesting that we should stop calling them stubs in our internal deliberations. That would be stupid, and totally against any reasonable evaluation of human nature. We should even keep the name of the tag {stub}. What I am suggesting, is that we change the text displayed to casual readers of our content, to reflect that we are not genuinely ashamed of brief articles. Not only should the term "stub" be removed, but the whole template should lose the imperative mode, and claim that expansion will happen in the future tense. To me the question of what should replace the term "stub" is largely irrelevant, but I could see "ready reference article", "brief article", "information in brief" for instance as being hugely preferable. Do please give the matter serious and thoughtful consideration before rejecting it out of hand, thank you. -- Cimon avaro; on a pogostick. 00:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
We're familiar with the term stub. We should not allow that familiarity to cloud the fact that outsiders are not familiar with our terminology. We should be as accessible as possible, and making up our own words isn't helping. (Disambiguation is an actual word, incidentally, and fairly easy to understand from its components, but perhaps a more obvious term could be found for that too.) — Simetrical ( talk • contribs) 07:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I see the point - and I would have no objection to the wording of stub templates being changed to indicate "this article is a stub - i.e., it is incomplete. Blah blah blah..." I don't see any reason why the template and category names should be changed though. It should be noted thought that stub articles are not "ready reference" articles, in that ready references in encyclopedias are summaries of complete articles mentioning all the important information from the full articles - stubs are articles with important information missing. Also, because of the way Wikipedia works, it is virtually impossible for an article to be truly complete. It is the peculiar nature of Wikipedia which means that there is really no exact synonym for "stub" in the non-Wiki world. Grutness... wha? 07:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
A couple of very important points are worth mentioning here - first, if there is to be wholesale change it should be done very carefully. many of these templates are used by vast numbers of articles, and as such changes to them can cause a great deal of distress to the servers (which is why a lot of them are protected). Second, no change should occur without getting input from the people who deal with stubs the most, WP:WSS, since a LOT of work has gone into maintaining the stub templates and trying to keep them as uniform as possible. Any wholesale changes that are made to stub templates without discussion there are likely to be swiftly reverted. As such, I've noted this discussion on the WP:WSS talk page and would ask that any moves to change the templates should be held off until after there has been input from some of the other regular stub-sorters. Grutness... wha? 08:38, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I feel fairly neutral about the "jargon" aspect; Pharos's suggestion seems fairly sensible, but as the text is linked to a defining document in either case, I doubt it makes much difference. It would make the text longer though, something we already gets gripes about in some cases. The original premise of changing it for "PR reasons" I'd be strongly opposed to; to tag stubs as "Micropaedia articles", and therefore brief by design would be a wholesole misresepresentation. The idea of changing the text to some bland passive-voice statement that the article "will be expanded", from its present active encouragement to expand it would also a step backward: rather than trying to bluster for the benefit of "casual readers", we should continue to go out of our way to encourage them to become more than that. Alai 16:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I like Pharos' suggestion a lot. As for server load, since this is one-time, it's a very minor concern; it will probably cause a slight hiccup when you edit the really heavily-used templates like {{
stub}}, but nothing to be worried about. An old notice on {{
qif}} said it caused database lock of just a few seconds, and I'm pretty sure that was used massively more than {{
stub}} (to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pages; I don't know about this). Server load for template changes is generally overstated. Current
Chief Technical Officer
Brion Vibber (who now was and is in charge of "maintain[sing] overall responsibility for all technical functions of the Foundation, including both hardware and software", although the post didn't exist at the time) has
said: "'Policy' shouldn't really concern itself with server load except in the most extreme of cases; keeping things tuned to provide what the user base needs is our job." —
Simetrical (
talk •
contribs)
04:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
As for the devs telling you to do anything, I see this (developer Jamesday says meta-templates should be dropped, saying nothing about isolated changes to the template, and this well over a year ago; Brion explicitly countermands him about a year later), this and this and this (Jamesday says categories should be dropped or cut down upon, saying nothing about isolated changes to the template, and this almost a year and a half ago; nobody seemingly asked other devs, but Brion later ended up countermanding similar statements of James), and this (Jamesday says images should be dropped, saying nothing about isolated changes to the templates; Brion explicitly countermands him shortly thereafter). In other words: none of these changes had anything to do with what we're discussing, namely isolated changes to the templates; all of them came from the same developer; and that developer was overruled by the one explicitly given responsibility for Wikimedia server performance. — Simetrical ( talk • contribs) 00:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
-- Jay Turner 18:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
This template appears to have a spurious extra line break the bottom. Which is not consistent with the other stub templates, so the layout gets mucked up a bit when a stub is sorted. Can someone please remove the line break? Thanks! GeorgeStepan e k\ talk 03:11, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
While we're considering changing all stubs (see #Renaming "stubs" to "Ready references".):
<div>
is unnecessary here. Use <p>
, since that's what it is.id="stub"
needs to be changed; it has to be a class
, not an id
, because some pages have more than one stub template and it's illegal (as well as pointless) to duplicate id
s.So the content part of the template should become
<p class="notice metadata stub">This article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]</span>.</p>
Then the line
.stub { font-style: italics; }
should be added to Mediawiki:Common.css. Similar changes, of course, must be made to all stub templates. — Simetrical ( talk • contribs) 04:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
This template can be made more universal by using {{ SITENAME}} instead of hardcoding "Wikipedia", e.g.
''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by ..
becomes
''This article is a [[{{ns:Project}}:Stub|stub]]. You can help {{SITENAME}} by ..
Pimlottc 15:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Please add
el:Πρότυπο:Επέκταση
in the interwiki section.
--
Anastasios
15:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Done and done. -- TheParanoidOne 17:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Can someone add the Arabic interwiki? Just in case, here it is:
ar:قالب:بذرة
--
Qasamaan 20:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Added. —
xaosflux
Talk
02:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Can someone help create the Stub for yo.wikipedia.org? -- Qasamaan 09:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
The transwiki link to Lojban page could be added to the page (jbo:Template:na_mulno). I guess some other "stub" links are missing, too. -- 82.139.47.118 10:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
bg:Шаблон:Мъниче Thanks.-- Петър Петров 16:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
That this template is uncategorised? --– Xoid 23:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
LOL. In fact, we are currently debating as to create a Category:Stub templates. If you think it is a good idea, please come and take part in the debate. Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 00:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Please copy and paste this new list of interwiki links. It adds af: az: be: cs: ko: la: lb: li: sr: fi: tl: uk: ur: vec:, updates bs: ca: ga: hr: id: ia: it: ku: lv: lt: hu: mi: ms: nn: oc: ru: sl: su: sv: tt: wa: and sorts the whole list according to english standards.
<!-- interwiki --> [[af:Sjabloon:Saadjie]] [[als:Vorlage:Stumpen]] [[ang:Template:Stycce]] [[ar:قالب:بذرة]] [[az:Şablon:Qaralama]] [[be-x-old:Шаблён:Накід]] [[bs:Šablon:U začetku]] [[bg:Шаблон:Мъниче]] [[ca:Plantilla:Esborrany]] [[cs:Šablona:Pahýl]] [[cy:Nodyn:Eginyn]] [[da:Skabelon:Stub]] [[el:Πρότυπο:Επέκταση]] [[es:Plantilla:Esbozo]] [[eo:Ŝablono:Ĝermo]] [[eu:Template:Zirriborroa]] [[fr:Modèle:Ébauche]] [[ga:Teimpléad:Stumpa]] [[gd:Template:Bun]] [[gl:Template:En progreso]] [[ko:틀:토막글]] [[ha:Template:Stub]] [[hsb:Předłoha:Stub]] [[hr:Predložak:Mrva]] [[id:Templat:Stub]] [[ia:Patrono:Pecietta]] [[is:Snið:Stubbur]] [[it:Template:S]] [[ku:Şablon:Kurt]] [[la:Formula:Stipula]] [[lv:Veidne:Stub]] [[lb:Template:Skizz]] [[lt:Šablonas:Stub]] [[li:Sjabloon:Sjtumpke]] [[jv:Cithakan:Stub]] [[jbo:Template:na mulno]] [[hu:Sablon:Csonk]] [[mk:Шаблон:Никулец]] [[mi:Template:Maramara]] [[ms:Templat:Stub]] [[nl:Sjabloon:Beg]] [[no:Mal:Stubb]] [[nn:Mal:Spire]] [[oc:Modèl:Esbòs]] [[pl:Szablon:Stub]] [[pt:Predefinição:Esboço]] [[ksh:Schablon:Stub]] [[ro:Format:Ciot]] [[ru:Шаблон:Заготовка]] [[scn:Template:Stub]] [[simple:Template:Stub]] [[sk:Šablóna:Výhonok]] [[sl:Predloga:Stub]] [[sr:Шаблон:Клица]] [[sh:Template:U začetku]] [[su:Citakan:Pondok]] [[fi:Malline:Tynkä]] [[sv:Mall:Stub]] [[tl:Template:Stub]] [[tt:Ürnäk:Töpçek]] [[th:แม่แบบ:โครง]] [[vi:Tiêu bản:Sơ khai]] [[tr:Şablon:Taslak]] [[uk:Шаблон:Доробити]] [[ur:سانچہ:نامکمل]] [[vec:Template:Stub]] [[wa:Modele:Djermon]] [[zh:Template:Stub]] [[zh-yue:Template:楔]]
I could have written down only the changes, but it was much faster for me as it will be for you just to copy and paste the whole list. Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 09:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
An update has been made to the above list. Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 20:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Another update has been made. By the way, why hasn't this template been given a /doc page such as with Template:En icon? It would make the interwiki updates much easier, wouldn't it? Robin des Bois ♘ ➳ ✉ 03:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Please add th:แม่แบบ:โครง into the list of interwiki languages. Thanks -- Jutiphan 22:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I think that the stub should have an optional param so that you format it like {{stub|cat}} that way we do not have to create a new template for each category. Sample at {{ stubc}} Comperr 02:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Also, it would mean one template on 400,000 pages. Which would cause so much strain on the servers that we probably wouldn't have a working Wikipedia any more. Not to mention the problem with slight variants on piping used meaning that virtaully identical parallel stub types would start cropping up everywhere. Grutness... wha? 00:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
{{
tl}}
springs to mind) –
Gurch
17:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)After concerns raised at WP talk:Stub about the complexity of WP:STUB, I have written a rough draft to shorten it. The new draft contains the same information, but is 25% shorter. It also removes some of the information on how to create stub templates - information which is in part responsible for the large number of "discoveries" and is also responsible (due to the misreading by some editors) of the need to trawl the non-existent Category:B stubs for stubs "about A". Please feel free to make any comments, positive or negative on my new draft ( User:Grutness/WP Stub rewrite (draft) at its talk page. (crossposted to WP talk:Stub and WP talk:WSS) Grutness... wha? 00:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
example:
....
{{ editprotected}}
Can someone change this for me since it is protected?
The current template reads:
<div class="notice metadata" id="stub">''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]. ''</div><includeonly>[[Category:Stubs]]</includeonly>
I wanted to change it to:
<div class="notice metadata" id="stub">''This article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]</span>.''</div><includeonly>[[Category:Stubs]]</includeonly>
The only thing it would do is make the text expanding it appear as a plain link rather than an external link. — The Future 04:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I suggest that the stub template assert that contributions must be GFDL licensed; perhaps something like
thank you for considering this. Crimethinker 21:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I see your point, Crimethinker, but we also have to consider that some editors resent even having the stub templates at all, and these templates would only become more dominating if we include large chuncks of text. This problem is in turn increased when some articles use more than one stub template. The GFDL reminder really applies to all articles, not only stub articles. Just my 2 cents. Happy editing. Valentinian T / C 13:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}}
I propose that a few parameters be added to this template to allow for standardization of the stub templates. Rather than having haphazard styling of stub templates, each stub template would just be a reference to Template:Stub. For example, the contents of {{ australia-bcast-stub}} could become:
{{stub |id=[[Image:Wireless tower.svg|30px]] |kindofarticle=article related to [[broadcasting]] in [[Australia]] |category=Australia broadcasting stubs }}
This would produce:
![]() |
This article related to broadcasting in Australia is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
Even so, {{ stub}} would still display a generic stub notice:
![]() |
This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
Changing to this templated system would allow for easily creating and modifying stub types and ensuring consistent styling among all stub templates. For example, it would make sure that the "expanding it" link is a plain link (in other words, does not display the external link symbol).
The new template code would be like this:
{| class="boilerplate metadata" id="stub" style="background-color:transparent" | style="padding-right:0.5em; {{{idstyle|}}}" | {{{id|[[Image:Wiki letter w.svg|30px]]}}} || ''This {{{kindofarticle|article}}} is a [[Wikipedia:Perfect stub article|stub]]. You can [[Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub|help]] Wikipedia by <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]</span>''. |} [[Category:{{{category|Stubs}}}]]<noinclude> {{/doc}}</noinclude>
— Remember the dot ( talk) 19:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
{{stub |id=[[Image:Wireless tower.svg|30px]] |kindofarticle=article related to [[broadcasting]] in [[Australia]] |category=Australia broadcasting stubs }}
Please wait until there is consensus before adding editprotected tags. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 23:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Monthly Period
Pre-MS Symptoms Cycle Post-MS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.153.221.219 ( talk) 13:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Um... thanks for contributing to Wikipedia? Terraxos ( talk) 02:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC) Just a note, stub type proposals go on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals. -- 98.114.243.75 ( talk) 23:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
{{ editprotected}} Add an Image. Preview:
BL Rochester, AKA Brian L. Rochester, is the author of The Joey Jenkins Mysteries. The Joey Jenkins Mystery Series is a series of childrens books for school aged boys, ranging from 9 - 12 years old.
"The Mystery at Camp Davis" 2004 - ISBN: 1-4137-7528-4
As school is nearing the end, Joey Jenkins and his friends are getting ready for a return visit to summer camp at Camp Davis. But, the gang meets a new camper this year, and Mr. Davis's prize winning Calico Goat named Billy Bear is missing. With the help of an expert animal tracker named Tommy Clearwater, will the bunch be able to find Billy Bear in time for the county fair? Will they find out how he disappeared? Read along as Joey and friends investigate “The Mystery at Camp Davis”.
"Something is Missing at Redding Lake" 2005 - ISBN: 1-4241-0065-8
Grandma and Grandpa’s house has a secret. It also has a really tall tale. For Joey Jenkins, Thanksgiving Vacation means that he’s in the middle of another mystery. Will he find out what’s kept Grandpa searching for so long? Will Brooke convince Aunt Lauren of the truth? And, will Thomas finally face that bully? Come along and discover what’s missing at Redding Lake, as Joey and family solve another Joey Jenkins Mystery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.195.208.239 ( talk) 02:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
Please add an interwiki link to the Japanese version of this template: [[ja:Template:Stub]]
Thanks. -- Nightshadow28 ( talk) 03:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Out of interest, is there any reason stub templates look the way they do and appear at the bottom of the article rather than other templates like Template:Wikify? I'm not proposing anything, just wondering if there's been any discussion on this. For example, see User:Alex.muller/draft. — alex.muller ( talk • edits) 22:20, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, both the style and location of stub templates has been discussed in the past, and they are both as they are for good reasons. As far as the box is concerned, a stub template is meant to be unobtrusive (it should be obvious to the reader that an article is a stub). Similarly with the location - we don't want the template to get in the way of reading the article, since it's a note to an editor rather than a reader. In many ways, it would make some sense if other editor-related templates (e.g., {{ wikify}}) wewre put at the bottom, too, leaving only content related ones like {{ hoax}} at the top, but stub templates c ertainly should go at the bottom of the articles. Grutness... wha? 23:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I notice this template isn't categorized. Shouldn't it be?-- Kotniski ( talk) 11:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
I'll take this opportunity to draw stub boffs' attention to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Stub category policy concerning the possible hiding of stub categories. I will also have a related proposal to include a link to the stub category in the stub notice (template) itself, but I'm not sure what's the best place to bring it up (here? project page?)-- Kotniski ( talk) 12:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Well to be precise, the proposal is to move towards stub messages which look like this (subst'ed from User:Kotniski/metastub):
This would make the category more obviously accessible, while allowing it to be harmlessly hidden (from the Categories box) as proposed in the above-mentioned discussion.-- Kotniski ( talk) 15:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
The categories would still appear normally in the template code, of course, and anyone wishing to see them displayed in the categories section of articles as they are now need only select "show hidden categories" under "my preferences". -- Kotniski ( talk) 07:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Please add de:Vorlage:Lückenhaft. — Guy Peters Talk • Contributions • Edit counter 09:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
A noinclude link to Category:Stub categories may be a good idea. 78.34.128.1 ( talk) 05:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I know it's a big project, I've done similar sized mergers myself, but why not merge all the varieties of stubs into one template? It would make it much more convenient for editors, and I even thought out the code! It might go a little something like this:
{{#SWITCH: {{{1|{{{category|}}}))) |#default=''This{{#ifeq: {{{1{{{category|}}})))||| [[{{{1{{{category}}})))]]-related}} article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]. ''</div>[[Category:{{#ifeq: {{{1{{{category|}}})))|||{{{1{{{category}}}))) }}Stubs]]<br> |1900s novel={{1900s novel stubs}}<br> |1910s novel={{1910s novel stubs}}<br> |1920s comedy film={{1920s comedy film stubs}}<br> |1920s novel={{1920s novel stubs}}<br> <br> ...<br> <br> |Zosteropidae={{Zosteropidae stubs}}<br> |Ząbkowice Śląskie County geography={{Ząbkowice Śląskie County geography stubs}}<br> }}
All it will take is the copy-pasting of |={{}}
5584 times and then copy-pasting the names, and this way, all the existing stub inclusion links will still work! Again, I know it seems daunting, but that's
what we did in Simpedia, and I know there is more help here!—
Supuhstar
*
§
23:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
''This{{#ifeq: {{{1{{{category|}}})))||| [[{{{1{{{category}}})))]]-related}} article is a [[Wikipedia:Stub|stub]]. You can help Wikipedia by [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]. ''</div>[[Category:{{#ifeq: {{{1{{{category|}}})))|||{{{1{{{category}}}))) }}Stubs]]
The stub tag is only for articles, but it is often used in other namespaces (User: and now Wikipedia:). Could we add namespace detection to only include the category if the article is in the mainspace?
I believe the problem only exists for {{ stub}} itself, not the more specific stub templates. I think other than the day of the stub-bot's run, the stub cat usually has less than a hundred articles, and is often empty. Hence, I don't think there is a performance problem.
I've seen two or three users (persistently) tagging userspace drafts as stubs, and now there is WP:Stub example. Hence, I do think there is some actual need.
If the idea sounds good, here is what my {{
editprotected}} request would be:
If this sounds like a good idea, I'll ask for the editprotected. JackSchmidt ( talk) 16:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Why is this missing? -- Steven Fruitsmaak ( Reply) 09:39, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I guess I don't quite understand the reversion of my most recent edit to this template, making it so Category:Stubs would only appear on mainspace pages. The reasoning was "we need to be able to find it elsewhere so that we can remove it" - First of all, we can use the "what links here" function to do that, and second of all, I don't really see the need to remove the stub template from, say, someone's userspace subpage with a draft article. The category being on such a page is more problematic, since the category is specifically meant for mainspace pages, not user or other namespace pages, so the category becomes polluted when these other namespace pages are included. Also, is anybody going to actually regularly go through and remove these pages if the category stays? I'm doubtful about that. I think we should revert back to my version. VegaDark ( talk) 16:14, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be a gold lock showing that this page is protected? Jonathan321 ( talk) 01:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)