Template talk:Stub

Where?
Where in an article do we put this template? -Paladin
 * You can stick it either in the section that needs the expansion or at the end of an article. Either way, generally a stub will indicate that the whole thingee should be read through and checked for spots needing expansion. --Guppymomma 18:25, 6 August 2005 (PDT)
 * Yeah, but what about other templates and stuff like that? I think it's the most prettifulsome when it's above the bigger things like that list of furniture items. -Paladin
 * I'm not sure what you mean prettifulsome. This template shouldn't go inside other templates, but it's fine to have more than one template on a page. If you're talking about visibility, you can just place it wherever you see fit.  The main thing the template does is add the article to Category:Stub for browsing.  Mediawiki also keeps its own "stub" list in the form of Guppymomma 18:38, 6 August 2005 (PDT)
 * It's just that I see it all over the place randomly. -Paladin
 * The beauty of a wiki, is that if that bothers you enough, you can correct it. Of course some artisan will come along and claim the aparent randomness is better. =D 03:58, 7 August 2005 (PDT)

What?
Yaten showed me Barrister which has (besides the giggle inducing photo) a nice this article is in need of attention template. We like the template. I also especially like the article linked to "attention" in it. Might this be a good change to stub? Mediawiki already automatically tracks stub pages at Special:Shortpages. Although admittedly many of those are short because they are disambig or redirect pages. In any case, even if an attention type template doesn't replace this stub template, I think adding a separate attention template would be good. And I think an article like the attention one would be doubly good (albeit one tailored to YPPedia's specifications). Any thoughts on this? --Guppymomma 22:36, 9 August 2005 (PDT)


 * I agree that having an "attention" template would be good. But I think I'd like to wait a couple of weeks before slapping it on pages.  Give people a chance to flesh things out.  --Barrister 23:21, 9 August 2005 (PDT)


 * On another note, I really like the looks of, which would fit in well with many of our individual sections that we don't have enough info on, and would reduce the amount of confusion over why an article is a stub, etc.   00:28, 11 August 2005 (PDT)


 * That looks nice, maybe we should switch the stub wording to be that of a section. Then we can use an attention template for overall article needing work. --Guppymomma 07:00, 11 August 2005 (PDT)


 * Sad to say, I like the current . Although being plain text, it can blend in with an article pretty easily. Perhaps until we decide whether to keep or remove it, we add two horizontal rules to it, much like  . Making it look more like this:

''Arr! This article be a stub. Ye can help YPPedia by [ expanding it].''


 * Just a thought. -- 04:24, 6 May 2006 (PDT)

Category:Stub -> Category:Stubs
I'm pretty sure the category for stubs should be Category:Stubs, not Category:Stub; I was hoping I could just change the template and it would all update, but it looks like it would require bumping every page with the stub tag. Is it worth doing so? (Keep in mind that I intend on de-stubbing a lot of Azure articles and the like, so part of the drudgery of this update could be subsumed in that.) --Emufarmers 13:12, 28 May 2006 (PDT)
 * I say nay. I think the non-plural works as the articles contained in the category are an individual stub... --Sagacious (talk) 16:10, 28 May 2006 (PDT)
 * Um...That's simply not how categories work: They're pretty much always in the plural (even the other stub categories, like crewstub, are plural). Take a look at stubs on Wikipedia.  I've done my homework on this one. :P --Emufarmers 16:17, 28 May 2006 (PDT)
 * * Poke* I'll hold off on doing any mass bumping/de-stubbing stuff until the newstandard frenzy finishes, but are there any other objections? --Emufarmers 20:49, 1 June 2006 (PDT)
 * I don't think anyone will be objecting to this, but it's rather pedantic, isn't it? :-/ --Ponytailguy 20:50, 1 June 2006 (PDT)
 * It's a wiki, to each his own idea of exciting editing tasks. ;) I think it'd be fine to make it plural to help aid the standardization of plurals in categories.  I also think it's a fine idea to hold off on the project during the frenzy and concentrate efforts on helping with the pirate articles.  It's an opportunity to work on creating content.  --Guppymomma 20:57, 1 June 2006 (PDT)