Hi all - I've just been in discussion with User:Uncle G about {{vocab-stub}}, which has apparently been deprecated because it is redundant to {{Move to Wiktionary}}. This came as a surprise to me for several reasons: (1) I don't recall this deprecation ever having been discussed here - as far as I was concerned it was still in regular use; (2) stub types are rarely deprecated - they are usually either in use or deleted through SFD; (3) the primary purpose of that stub type isn't to mark things for moving to wiktionary - it is to mark articles on vocabulary and usage which qualifty for wikipedia articles in their own right, as explained in the note at WP:STUB#Basic information. When was this deprecation decided, and why? Grutness...wha? 22:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-05-05T22:51:00.000Z","author":"Grutness","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Grutness-2007-05-05T22:51:00.000Z-Deprecation_of_{{Vocab-stub}}?","replies":["c-SMcCandlish-2007-05-05T23:03:00.000Z-Grutness-2007-05-05T22:51:00.000Z","c-Alai-2007-09-28T16:42:00.000Z-Grutness-2007-05-05T22:51:00.000Z"]}}-->
Please stop the double spacing between the text and the stub template. It is against MOS and it is NOT necessary. The stub templates are clear enough breaks from the articles. There is already enough space between the text of the article and the stub template.199.126.28.20 05:46, 22 June 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-06-22T05:46:00.000Z","author":"199.126.28.20","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-199.126.28.20-2007-06-22T05:46:00.000Z-Double_spacing","replies":["c-Valentinian-2007-06-22T09:25:00.000Z-199.126.28.20-2007-06-22T05:46:00.000Z","c-Alai-2007-07-01T18:38:00.000Z-199.126.28.20-2007-06-22T05:46:00.000Z","c-Valentinian-2007-09-22T05:38:00.000Z-199.126.28.20-2007-06-22T05:46:00.000Z"]}}-->
<br />
There's a long debate on whether {{Expand}} should be deleted, over at WP:TFD. Looks like the outcome will be "no consensus", but it's clear from the comments that a lot of people aren't sure when it should be used. I've put the case that it should never be used on the same article as a stub template (as mentioned here in the past), and also commented that it might be worth - once stubsense is back running properly - trying to seek out any articles that use both it and a stub template, in order to remove one or the other from those articles. Any thoughts on that? Grutness...wha? 02:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-07-17T02:21:00.000Z","author":"Grutness","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Grutness-2007-07-17T02:21:00.000Z-TFD_debate_on_{{Expand}}","replies":[]}}-->
This is to propose the idea of stubs that deal with repertory theater companies and the actors affiliated therewith. It would be filed under Entertainment, Theater/Stage, Film, and Television, and would include lists of member actors of the repertory theater companies.
Parker Gabriel 21:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-05T21:36:00.000Z","author":"Parker Gabriel","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Parker_Gabriel-2007-08-05T21:36:00.000Z-Actors-repertory_theater_companies-stubs?","replies":["c-SMcCandlish-2007-08-05T23:03:00.000Z-Parker_Gabriel-2007-08-05T21:36:00.000Z"]}}-->
In a number of cases, we do some "lumping" of countries in a way that often doesn't correspond to the structure of the permcats, due to size considerations. This is fine, but what could do with further examination is on what basis we define these "lumpings". In particular, we oculd do with a bit of 'democratic centralism' about whether we're using the UN geoscheme or not. (Or what point in between using and not-using.) Alai 18:08, 11 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-11T18:08:00.000Z","author":"Alai","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alai-2007-08-11T18:08:00.000Z-UN_geoscheme","replies":["c-Valentinian-2007-08-11T21:08:00.000Z-Alai-2007-08-11T18:08:00.000Z"]}}-->
A bot request was posted at Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 51#Assessment bot which could be a great help to stub sorting. Give it a gander. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 05:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-12T05:29:00.000Z","author":"JohnnyMrNinja","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JohnnyMrNinja-2007-08-12T05:29:00.000Z-Assessment_bot","replies":[]}}-->
JMN has also filed a request for a "stub sorting bot", which goes a bit further than the initial request. Should probably have some wider WPSS input on that. Alai 13:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-17T13:25:00.000Z","author":"Alai","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alai-2007-08-17T13:25:00.000Z-Assessment_bot","replies":[]}}-->
Some time ago, Thomas Macmillan sorted the entire material relating to African politicians by country, creating templates for next to all of these countries (if I remember correctly, Western Sahara is missing due to its status as a disputed territory and so are a few minor French islands near Africa). South and Central America are almost done as well, and I'm thinking about creating upmerged <country>-politician-stub templates for the Asian nations. Trouble is that I haven't done a proper count of this material for quite a while. Should I do a count for each of them and list them all on WP:WSS/P or is this too bureaucratic? My guess would be that {{Palestine-politician-stub}} would be only template that might cause problems, but on the other hand, we already have both {{Palestine-stub}} and {{Palestine-bio-stub}}, so I don't think we'll see any real problems here. Thoughts? Valentinian T / C 21:43, 13 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-13T21:43:00.000Z","author":"Valentinian","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Valentinian-2007-08-13T21:43:00.000Z-Upmerged_templates_for_Asian_politicans?","replies":["c-Valentinian-2007-08-14T09:37:00.000Z-Valentinian-2007-08-13T21:43:00.000Z"]}}-->
I have proposed a speedy delete criteria for a duplicate stub type. This will make things much easier for Grutness. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 06:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-14T06:34:00.000Z","author":"JohnnyMrNinja","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JohnnyMrNinja-2007-08-14T06:34:00.000Z-Speedy_delete_for_a_duplicate_stub_type","replies":[]}}-->
As you can see on Category:Southern United States road stubs, the five subcategories use two different sortkey methods, when both should be using the same format. Which one, if any, is considered "canon", if you will, for WSS? --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 06:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-19T06:23:00.000Z","author":"TwinsMetsFan","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-TwinsMetsFan-2007-08-19T06:23:00.000Z-Sortkeys_for_stub_categories","replies":["c-Valentinian-2007-08-19T15:25:00.000Z-TwinsMetsFan-2007-08-19T06:23:00.000Z"],"displayName":"TMF"}}-->
Something was brought up at bot requests... There are currently two types of stub on Wikipedia, assessment-stubs and template-stubs. This is an odd double standard. I would think that either both should mean the same thing or there should be two different terms used. I have brought it up at the village pump, so please add any thoughts there. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 17:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-19T17:13:00.000Z","author":"JohnnyMrNinja","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JohnnyMrNinja-2007-08-19T17:13:00.000Z-Two_types_of_stubs","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-08-20T00:18:00.000Z-JohnnyMrNinja-2007-08-19T17:13:00.000Z"]}}-->
Anybody in need of a laugh? Try checking out the topic of this deletion nom. Valentinian T / C 23:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-28T23:55:00.000Z","author":"Valentinian","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Valentinian-2007-08-28T23:55:00.000Z-Need_a_laugh?","replies":[]}}-->
Hi all - there's rumblings over at Template talk:Expand about changes to {{Expand}}, {{Expand-section}} and {{Sectstub}} which may be worth commenting on by stub-sorteing regulars... Grutness...wha? 00:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-08-29T00:36:00.000Z","author":"Grutness","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Grutness-2007-08-29T00:36:00.000Z-Expand_and_Sectstub_templates","replies":[]}}-->
I proposed a stub July 17th (book-arts-stub) and I can't seem to find what happened to it. The link in my "contributions" page takes me to the July stub proposals [2], which have been archived. When I click that link[3] and search for book-arts I find nothing. I've also googled for it using site:en.wikipedia.org and didn't find anything. Where should I go to find out what happened with the proposal? You can reply here, I have this page Watched. Thanks! --Bookgrrl holler/lookee here 15:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-01T15:38:00.000Z","author":"Bookgrrl","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Bookgrrl-2007-09-01T15:38:00.000Z-book-arts-stub","replies":["c-Alai-2007-09-01T18:11:00.000Z-Bookgrrl-2007-09-01T15:38:00.000Z"]}}-->
Hi there! I have noticed the Maribyrnong River on "Wikipedia" and I am very happy to have my local River included. However I can not find any entry's regarding "Canoeing/ Kayaking" on this River nor "Rowing" activeties. Thera are two Canoe Clubs and Rowing Clubs situatet on our River! Fred Jordan ( life member ) "Essendon Canoe Club est. 1925". <canoefrd@operamail.com.au> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.175.201 (talk) 01:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-06T01:02:00.000Z","author":"59.101.175.201","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-59.101.175.201-2007-09-06T01:02:00.000Z-Maribyrnong_River_\/Victoria_\/_Australia.","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-09-06T06:40:00.000Z-59.101.175.201-2007-09-06T01:02:00.000Z"]}}-->
Hi all - there is now a full list of nation-level (and nation-like, non-ontiguous or autonomous region-level) geo-stubs listed at User:Grutness/Geo-stub list. All of them are regular names, after NG fashion, at least, and there are now only a small handful of (mainly uninhabited) regions without such templates - all of which are currently awaiting naming suggestions on the proposals page (int, hint). Given that the geo-stubs are AFAIK the only near-complete by nation (and etc.) split of templates, these can perhaps be used as guides to the naming of similar splits for -bio- -politician- -hist- etc stubs. Grutness...wha? 00:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-13T00:07:00.000Z","author":"Grutness","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Grutness-2007-09-13T00:07:00.000Z-Full_list_of_\"nation-x-stub\"_names","replies":[]}}-->
I recently added the missing "top-level" stub templates to the text of Category:Sportspeople stubs[4]. I noticed that there are lots of second- and third-level templates missing, e.g. {{Canada-lacrosse-bio-stub}}, {{collegefootball-coach-stub}}, etc. Do you think it's worth adding all the missing second- and third-level stub templates as well? DH85868993 16:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-18T16:11:00.000Z","author":"DH85868993","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-DH85868993-2007-09-18T16:11:00.000Z-Category:Sportspeople_stubs","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-09-18T23:40:00.000Z-DH85868993-2007-09-18T16:11:00.000Z"]}}-->
Every so often, a new sub-category is created for a stub category, and the user who creates the sub-category doesn't have time to fully recategorize the stubs. I think we should have a template to place on such categories, which should look similar to the following:
This category is in the process of being split. If you find any stub which seems to belong to Category:newtype stubs, please recategorize them.
What do you think about this? Od Mishehu 10:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-19T10:22:00.000Z","author":"Od Mishehu","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Od_Mishehu-2007-09-19T10:22:00.000Z-A_template_for_a_stub_category_which_is_being_split_off","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-09-19T23:41:00.000Z-Od_Mishehu-2007-09-19T10:22:00.000Z","c-Alai-2007-09-20T02:27:00.000Z-Od_Mishehu-2007-09-19T10:22:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Od"}}-->
I just made a proposal concerning this project at the village pump. Go there and discuss it, if possible. --CrazyLegsKC 05:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-21T05:26:00.000Z","author":"CrazyLegsKC","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-CrazyLegsKC-2007-09-21T05:26:00.000Z-Proposal","replies":[],"displayName":"Crazy"}}-->
I noticed that there are some categories misnamed. Instead of Category:Figure skating biography stubs, and Category:Speed skating biography stubs, the names are Category:Figure skater stubs and Category:Speed skater stubs. Should these be changed (and if so, how?) Also, the figure skating cat has a few subcats which are similarly misnamed. Neier 13:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-21T13:18:00.000Z","author":"Neier","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Neier-2007-09-21T13:18:00.000Z-Misnamed?_stub_categories","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-09-22T23:20:00.000Z-Neier-2007-09-21T13:18:00.000Z"]}}-->
There's an illustration used in a stub template that's I like to suggest a change to. What do I do? Thank you. --24.211.242.80 00:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-23T00:17:00.000Z","author":"24.211.242.80","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-24.211.242.80-2007-09-23T00:17:00.000Z-Stub_template_photo","replies":["c-Alai-2007-09-23T00:44:00.000Z-24.211.242.80-2007-09-23T00:17:00.000Z"]}}-->
<pokes head above parapet> Over the years I have thought about the problems of stub templates, and have visited these pages from time to time, and while the stub sorting project is making great progress and is very sophisticated there are recurring problems with the templates themselves. So I created a template Template:Asbox - which deals with some of these problems, and allows for solutions to be developed for some others. Have a look.
Rich Farmbrough, 09:33 27 September 2007 (GMT).
(don't ask me how many of those I've converted by hand...), but on casual inspection OK otherwise. But what are these mysteriously-alluded-to problems this is intended to fix? Personally I generally settle for anything that doesn't screw up page layout, is reasonably brief, has a 40x30 or less icon, is free from meta-spam, and doesn't screw around with noinclude/includeonly more than my own personal indulgence of top-sorting the template, and "code" it by starting off some some obviously-related tag, fixing any of said issues with it, and basing the new one on that. But if I were so well-organised as to actually use {{metastub}}, like I'm currently supposed to, what would this do "better"? Alai 16:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-27T16:33:00.000Z","author":"Alai","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alai-2007-09-27T16:33:00.000Z-Stub_template_standardisation","replies":[]}}-->
Erm... that's all for now. Rich Farmbrough, 18:08 27 September 2007 (GMT).
Oh, you're proposing this as a transcludable meta-template, rather than as a substitutable one? Egads. Well firstly, there's the oft-heard "do you have any idea how many templates we'd need to change?" to implement that in the first place (I'm not sure that wail is actually oft-heard otherwise, at least not about anything there's actual general agreement that it really is a good idea), but of more concern to me would be the 'single point of failure' issues with that, and the consequent performance issues that, however obvious, it's apparently developer-mandated that we STFU about. That's been suggested before, and I remain very dubious about the idea (though given the already massive shenanigans in the template space, maybe that ship has largely sailed). That aside, sort order parameterisation (of the stub article) I've always been opposed to as largely-wasted effort (stub types are supposed to more of a set for editors, not a list for readers), and given DEFAULTSORT, seems highly unnecessary these days. And besides, they confuse my bot when it comes time to re-sort them. :) The category of stub templates in my estimation isn't required: a set of such were deleted a while back, revisited somewhat later, and again left non-existant. But those quibbles aside, I do very much agree with the general aim of standardisation (I hate to think how many I must have edited in that cause by now, and probably far from entirely consistently at that), so I'll try not to be too dogmatic about the means. Alai 18:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-27T18:55:00.000Z","author":"Alai","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alai-2007-09-27T18:55:00.000Z-Stub_template_standardisation","replies":["c-Alai-2007-09-27T22:22:00.000Z-Alai-2007-09-27T18:55:00.000Z"]}}-->
You will not believe me, but I was about to do the same. Good for me I went to look at this page first. I support the standartization and ready to join the effort in conversion, if one cannot do it by 'bot. Just drop me a note. At the same time I agree that a parameterized hypertemplate is kinda overkill here. I was thinking abut a single-param template for the text only. The rest of format is plain old cut'n'paste. Or am I missing some benefits of hypertemplates here? (besides the "single bottleneck" for screwing up) `'Míkka 07:21, 28 September 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-09-28T07:21:00.000Z","author":"Mikkalai","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Mikkalai-2007-09-28T07:21:00.000Z-Stub_template_standardisation","replies":["c-Alai-2007-09-28T10:58:00.000Z-Mikkalai-2007-09-28T07:21:00.000Z"],"displayName":"M\u00edkka"}}-->
<noinclude>| {{{templsort|}}}</noinclude>
If anyone but Rich (if even?) and I are paying attention at this point, transclusion costs and benefits gives a reasonably "fair and balanced" take on the pros and cons of mass use of meta-templates. (I might nudge that talk page to see if anyone wants to chime in here, indeed.) BTW, if the aim of this is standardisation, why wouldn't we be standardising things like image sizes in the process? Just replacing idiosyncratic inline code with meta-templatised code with idiosyncratic parameter values seems to give all the downside, and none of the claimed upside -- or certainly much less: granted there might be some tidying of table code and the like involved, I dunno. (Though obviously personally, I think we could just do the standardisation without the meta-templatisation, and amn't at all convinced of the need to build in scope to change what the "standard" itself is.) BTW, given the, um, strongly-expressed opposition to stub template parameterisation in some quarters, I'd suggest getting rid of all remaining provision for that in the m-t (again, that's if we really must have it at all). Alai 05:15, 3 October 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-10-03T05:15:00.000Z","author":"Alai","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alai-2007-10-03T05:15:00.000Z-Stub_template_standardisation","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-10-09T00:14:00.000Z-Alai-2007-10-03T05:15:00.000Z","c-Pegship-2007-10-11T18:37:00.000Z-Alai-2007-10-03T05:15:00.000Z"]}}-->
This is just to register a debate had over at Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/2007/October/1 with which others might share some sympathy. I appeared to have walked into an area of notably strong views and not as much understanding of what I was saying as I would have hoped. I was unable to find much debate in the archived talk pages to support the non-negotiable guidelines. But that's not what I want to talk about.
Most stub templates produce the sentence: "This blank-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it", often including an icon, and with the word expanding linked to the edit this page button. This lead me to believe that the point of stubs was to increase the conversion rate on such articles, possibly by enticing new users into contributing there where it was almost impossible not to make an improvement. Ideally we want articles to leave the stub category, and not remain within it.
Unfortunately, no concept relating to conversion rate is listed under this project's goals. Instead, the goals appear focussed towards only making stubs technically tidy within a whole series of mandated categories. Double and triple stubbing is preferable to making parametrized stubs containing, for example, pointers to a Wikiproject where hints and encouragement can be invited from people with the expertise.
I have held people's hands while they made their first wikipedia edit, and there is often a big barrier to making that step. It is likely that the people most daunted by it could become the best editors -- if they got past it. It's easy for us to forget the barriers.
It seems to me that the more an article appears to be in someone else's territory, the less likely it will be edited by someone new. If this is true then it predicts that, since icons in stubs and multiple stubbing makes the article look more developed and official, the more you have of that the less the stub will achieve the desired result -- if the desire is to get it elevated out of the stub category, rather than just making something empty look kind of pretty. Here's a radical idea:
The logic which people use on websites is unpredictable, and it can only be done experimentally, as I have found with my limited experience of tuning websites.
An experiment could be to hide the icons in half the stub templates, then come back in six months time to see whether more or fewer such articles remain in these stub categories than in the ones which do retain their attractive (and potentially discouraging) icons.
Such an experiment is unlikely to take place unless conversion rate was seen as one of the prime considerations of stub design. It would be nice if people thought it should be an important factor.
Goatchurch 20:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-10-09T20:08:00.000Z","author":"Goatchurch","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Goatchurch-2007-10-09T20:08:00.000Z-What_is_the_point_of_stubs_and_stub_icons","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-10-09T23:38:00.000Z-Goatchurch-2007-10-09T20:08:00.000Z","c-Alai-2007-10-09T23:53:00.000Z-Goatchurch-2007-10-09T20:08:00.000Z"]}}-->
From the functional spec we generate good script.
this is comes from devlopers.
writiing script is testers work for good quality script see below points
1. give brief information about the tool 2. give environment req to test 3. any kind of data testing and limited data testing to be mentioned in description. 4. any types users should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.195.187.198 (talk) 12:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-10-19T12:03:00.000Z","author":"193.195.187.198","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-193.195.187.198-2007-10-19T12:03:00.000Z-How_to_write_a_script","replies":["c-Alai-2007-10-22T23:55:00.000Z-193.195.187.198-2007-10-19T12:03:00.000Z"]}}-->
You may have noticed that the background colour for the stub category page boilerplate has changed; apparently it's been using markup intended for talk page templates all this while. I can't say I'm much taken with the new scheme, but that might just be the imprinting of having stared at thousands of 'em over time. There's a discussion at Wikipedia:Category message boxes about some sort of standardisation, but the current level seems to be approximately 'none'. We should probably given this some thought, at any rate. Alai 17:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-05T17:42:00.000Z","author":"Alai","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alai-2007-11-05T17:42:00.000Z-Colour_scheme_for_{{WPSS-cat}}","replies":["c-Valentinian-2007-11-05T17:49:00.000Z-Alai-2007-11-05T17:42:00.000Z","c-Valentinian-2007-11-05T17:59:00.000Z-Alai-2007-11-05T17:42:00.000Z"]}}-->
I suggest that by way of a placeholder, by the logic of "least surprising result", we for the time being use a colour similar to the long-standing one; but not identical, and not via the "talk page coding". Let's especially try not to get into needless revert wars on templates with thousands of transclusions. Alai 18:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-05T18:15:00.000Z","author":"Alai","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alai-2007-11-05T18:15:00.000Z-Colour_scheme_for_{{WPSS-cat}}","replies":["c-Pegship-2007-11-05T19:15:00.000Z-Alai-2007-11-05T18:15:00.000Z","c-Valentinian-2007-11-05T23:18:00.000Z-Alai-2007-11-05T18:15:00.000Z","c-Grutness-2007-11-05T23:37:00.000Z-Alai-2007-11-05T18:15:00.000Z"]}}-->
Might work. Here are a few experiments (warrenty or guarantee of usefulness does *not* apply) :)
This category is maintained by WikiProject: Stub sorting. Please propose new stub categories here before creating fresh categories and templates.
(original look)
(orange)
This category is maintained by WikiProject Stub sorting. Please propose new stub categories here before creating fresh categories and templates.
(pale blue)
(silver)
(grey)
(shamrock green)
(lime)
(olive)
(jade)
(moss green)
Thoughts? Valentinian T / C 00:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-06T00:19:00.000Z","author":"Valentinian","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Valentinian-2007-11-06T00:19:00.000Z-Colour_scheme_for_{{WPSS-cat}}","replies":["c-Pegship-2007-11-06T01:07:00.000Z-Valentinian-2007-11-06T00:19:00.000Z"]}}-->
I like the silver or the moss green. I was thinking of something part-way between moss green and lime green when I mentioned apple - sort of the tones of the lime but the softness of the moss. Grutness...wha? 01:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-06T01:57:00.000Z","author":"Grutness","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Grutness-2007-11-06T01:57:00.000Z-Colour_scheme_for_{{WPSS-cat}}","replies":[]}}-->
If we were working by "type", the closest I can find seems like {{consensus}}... which is the original, "talk page" colour. Oh well. I suggest an orange that's midway between that and "you have messages" orange used above, for the sake of making a minimal perturbation. If cat-page standardisation gets anywhere, after all, it may end up being changed significantly, so I'd prefer to avoid a series of rapid jumps in potentially opposite directions. Alai 02:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-06T02:20:00.000Z","author":"Alai","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alai-2007-11-06T02:20:00.000Z-Colour_scheme_for_{{WPSS-cat}}","replies":["c-Valentinian-2007-11-10T16:29:00.000Z-Alai-2007-11-06T02:20:00.000Z"]}}-->
There has been very little feed back regarding the Ordering the School stubs for United States as found on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types with the discussion question asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types#Ordering the School stubs for United States Before being bold and just doing it, I would like a bit of feed back first. Maybe I was asking in the work place, so I am added a request here as well, Thank you in advance for your consideration of this subjectDbiel (Talk) 12:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-08T12:19:00.000Z","author":"Dbiel","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Dbiel-2007-11-08T12:19:00.000Z-Ordering_the_School_stubs_for_United_States","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-11-08T23:15:00.000Z-Dbiel-2007-11-08T12:19:00.000Z"]}}-->
Are stub templates sufficiently high-risk to be protected/semi-protected as high-risk templates? I just reverted an anon editors devious little work on {{euro-school-stub}} that added the schools to a category German national socialist ....yadda yadda. Consider whether these templates are high risk and whether you want anons to have free rein on adding different categories to them. Carlossuarez46 05:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-15T05:53:00.000Z","author":"Carlossuarez46","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Carlossuarez46-2007-11-15T05:53:00.000Z-Protection_warranted?","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-11-15T07:44:00.000Z-Carlossuarez46-2007-11-15T05:53:00.000Z","c-Alai-2007-11-15T17:14:00.000Z-Carlossuarez46-2007-11-15T05:53:00.000Z"]}}-->
Hi all - I've nominated this for deletion at tfd - it was created by someone unaware that expand and stub templates aren't used together, and I'm having difficulty finding the actual documentation relating to it (several places which say "the documentation needs changing to show this", but no evidence that it's actually been done). Any input would be welcome. Grutness...wha? 23:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-16T23:06:00.000Z","author":"Grutness","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Grutness-2007-11-16T23:06:00.000Z-{{nostub-expand}}","replies":[]}}-->
What about trying this on the stub types list? I used it on the category page for Category:Computer stubs and it's really handy. Her Pegship (tis herself) 20:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-11-27T20:31:00.000Z","author":"Pegship","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Pegship-2007-11-27T20:31:00.000Z-Collapsible_tables","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-11-27T23:04:00.000Z-Pegship-2007-11-27T20:31:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Her Pegship"}}-->
Should we categorize Diplomats under a pure bio-stub or should the politician-stub do the trick? I am having this discussion here. We should come to a consensus on this issue.--Thomas.macmillan 15:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-12-03T15:02:00.000Z","author":"Thomas.macmillan","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Thomas.macmillan-2007-12-03T15:02:00.000Z-Diplomats_quandry","replies":[]}}-->
Hi all - I've just been looking through Special:Wanted categories toi see if there were any stub-related concerns there, and I discovered three cqategories which had been renamed or upmerged but which didn't have their articles move when the templates were changed. I've tried null edits on the templates, b ut there still seem to be a lot of articles in Category:Music producer stubs (which should be in Category:Record producer stubs), Category:Chess biographical stubs (which should be in Category:Chess biography stubs), and Category:Cricket history stubs (which were upmerged somewhere). The music producer one has over 100 unmoved stubs. Can't see what the problem is... any ideas? Grutness...wha? 10:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-12-08T10:46:00.000Z","author":"Grutness","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Grutness-2007-12-08T10:46:00.000Z-Problem_with_category_changes_in_templates","replies":["c-Alai-2007-12-09T21:06:00.000Z-Grutness-2007-12-08T10:46:00.000Z"]}}-->
The list of "to be created"s is getting big. Should I delete anything from 2006? From the last 6 months? Last rolling year? Your thoughts, please. Her Pegship (tis herself) 21:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-12-13T21:21:00.000Z","author":"Pegship","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Pegship-2007-12-13T21:21:00.000Z-Brevity_being_the_soul_of_wit...","replies":["c-Alai-2007-12-17T05:59:00.000Z-Pegship-2007-12-13T21:21:00.000Z","c-Pegship-2007-12-17T19:12:00.000Z-Pegship-2007-12-13T21:21:00.000Z","c-Alai-2007-12-18T06:03:00.000Z-Pegship-2007-12-13T21:21:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Her Pegship"}}-->
Excuse me if this is a common problem. However, Category:Video game gameplay stubs is a new stub category. Stub articles are not appearing in it, for instance Action point. Why is this? Thanks for your help! SharkD (talk) 09:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-12-15T09:43:00.000Z","author":"SharkD","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-SharkD-2007-12-15T09:43:00.000Z-Stub_articles_not_appearing_in_new_stub_category","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-12-15T11:13:00.000Z-SharkD-2007-12-15T09:43:00.000Z","c-Amalas-2007-12-16T23:32:00.000Z-SharkD-2007-12-15T09:43:00.000Z"]}}-->
There's a proposal over at the village pump to simply ban stubs. Caerwine Caer’s whines 00:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-12-27T00:08:00.000Z","author":"Caerwine","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Caerwine-2007-12-27T00:08:00.000Z-Village_pump","replies":[]}}-->
Most maintenance projects use a date parameter to indicate articles that have needed attention the longest, but not this one. How about repurposing {{stub}} as follows: 1. With no parameters {{stub}} serves to mark newly located stubs for us to sort. 2. When that stub is first sorted, then in addition to the subject specific templates, it keeps adds a parameter, i.e., {{stub|date=January 2008}} that would place stubs in categories such as Category:Stubs needing expansion from January 2008. 3. When the date parameter is present, the article would not be placed in Category:Stubs nor would it add the blurb text unless another parameter such as sorted=no were present.
This would enable editors to focus on stubs that have remained stubs for a long while. An alternative would be to add code to every stub template to do this, but I doubt that we'd want to or be able to ensure every stub template has the necessary code. Caerwine Caer’s whines 00:18, 27 December 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-12-27T00:18:00.000Z","author":"Caerwine","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Caerwine-2007-12-27T00:18:00.000Z-Repurposing_{{stub}}","replies":["c-Grutness-2007-12-27T03:34:00.000Z-Caerwine-2007-12-27T00:18:00.000Z","c-Grutness-2007-12-27T04:05:00.000Z-Caerwine-2007-12-27T00:18:00.000Z","c-Alai-2007-12-28T16:42:00.000Z-Caerwine-2007-12-27T00:18:00.000Z"]}}-->
-stub
sorted=no
I've noticed a handful of these edits lately. Any idea what's going on? Grutness...wha? 05:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-12-29T05:16:00.000Z","author":"Grutness","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Grutness-2007-12-29T05:16:00.000Z-What_is_Betacommandbot_up_to?","replies":["c-Swpb-2007-12-29T22:38:00.000Z-Grutness-2007-12-29T05:16:00.000Z","c-Grutness-2007-12-29T22:57:00.000Z-Grutness-2007-12-29T05:16:00.000Z"]}}-->
As people have noticed, I started removing the external link in stub templates. They do not anything that is not already available on the page. But they also cause a problem. When you search for improper external links, that link back to wikipedia, IE self refering links in the mainspace, Special:LinkSearch is flooded with extra links from every transclusion of a stub template. There is only one method of checking these and that is to manually load every single page and check the actual edit text. That is why I started removing the external edit links in templates. Are there any proof that the extra edit links actually do anything beneficial. βcommand 16:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)__DTREPLYBUTTONSCONTENT__-->__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2007-12-30T16:06:00.000Z","author":"Betacommand2","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Betacommand2-2007-12-30T16:06:00.000Z-Edit_links","replies":["c-Caerwine-2007-12-30T18:07:00.000Z-Betacommand2-2007-12-30T16:06:00.000Z","c-Betacommand2-2007-12-30T18:23:00.000Z-Betacommand2-2007-12-30T16:06:00.000Z","c-Betacommand-2008-01-01T21:25:00.000Z-Betacommand2-2007-12-30T16:06:00.000Z"]}}-->
[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} expanding it]
stub
[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit&stub}} expanding it]
[{{SERVER}}/w/index.php?stub&title={{FULLPAGENAMEE}}&action=edit expanding it]
Lokasi Pengunjung: 18.118.226.2