Template talk:Stub

Suggested change to Stub formatEdit

Discussion moved from UESPWiki_talk:Stub#Suggested change to Stub format

I'd like to suggest we start using Stubs that contain a short prewritten info about what is left to be added if its only one or two things. Full stubs would still be listed just as stub. But for example instead of

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

We use.

Note: This article needs <reason> and is a stub. You can help by expanding it.

to make the stub more informative in places where an incomplete flag wouldn't work. I think this would make the stubs much less ambiguous and more likely to get worked on if people could just look at the flag and say "Ah this one needs inventory still" or "this one says it needed a walkthrough but has one now so I can removed the stub flag" Lord Eydvar ^{Talk|Contribs} 08:40, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

I think this is a good idea. For those pages which are only missing one or two things in particular, it would be useful to display exactly what those things are. I think it would be a relatively easy change to make-- it would work more or less look the same, but just have an extra parameter to add what's missing from the page. As long as we get the wording right, I think this would be helpful. — ABCface^◥ 08:54, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

I've gotten a complete set of templates written up HERE for testing and exemplars. Removed Lord Eydvar ^{Talk|Contribs} 09:19, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

I like the fact that this usage needs no template change. It will however display the generic stub, not the namespace tweaked one. Then again, this may be a good thing, so stubs with information added stick out a bit. --Alfwyn (talk) 11:30, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

It does? I'm pretty sure its showing the namespace tweaked version. Lord Eydvar ^{Talk|Contribs} 12:01, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

You're right, it just is automatically a section formatted stub. Might still be a good thing. --Alfwyn (talk) 12:14, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

Yeah i knew it was section formatted because all I was doing was instead of saying Section I instead was placing as more descriptive message. I don't think the section flag should make any real problem as the idea is to have it tell more about whats needed in general which is sorta what the section flag is intended to do. Lord Eydvar ^{Talk|Contribs} 12:23, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

One thing I would prefer is to keep the transparency of it as it currently displays. I'm not sure how that would work, but I have faith that someone ( other than me :P ) could figure that out? — ABCface^◥ 15:28, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

(←) If we change the template, we have more options, both for the appearance and the wording. Some test implementation with an optional parameter for a messsage:

{{User:Alfwyn/Sandbox/Template:Stub|Creature|msg=some love|ns_base=Dragonborn}}

This sandbox is owned by a user who appears to be inactive. To avoid unnecessary maintenance edits, it has been blanked. If you are the owner of this sandbox, welcome back! If you'd like to return to what you were working on, you can click here to find your last saved version (usually the second one listed) and continue working on it.

--Alfwyn (talk) 15:59, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

I think that looks awesome! This is a great change, Alfwyn! If others agree that this is wanted, I'd support this version, it's neat, concise, and looks great. — ABCface^◥ 16:03, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

Yeah I agree this looks much better and is very flexible to the different needs/uses. Lord Eydvar ^{Talk|Contribs} 16:16, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

We've got a test template page set up so you can try it out.

Format: {{teststub|<pagetype>|msg=<message>}}

Example: {{teststub|Place|msg=lots of love}}

Result:{{teststub|Place|msg=lots of love}}

Lord Eydvar ^{Talk|Contribs} 16:51, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

I had a look at teststub and it looks great to me. The only thing extra I would suggest is that, like I mentioned for {{Wipsandbox}}, it would be good to remove the hard-coded project (in this case it is the Daggerfall Redesign Project), and replace it with a generic {{{project}}} parameter and an associated {{#if:{{{project|}}}...}} block. If we're making changes to the template anyway, this would be a great opportunity to make it more widely compatible with other projects. – Daric↝talk 04:48, 23 February 2013 (GMT)

Isn't this what the cleanup template is for? If you know specifically what is missing for it to be complete you add that tag with a message, including the words "to complete this article" or (some such). Tweaking the stub to add a message seems futile, as it is hidden at the bottom of the page, which for quests pages specifically is really out of the way, situated below the quest stages. A tag at the top of the page will be more likely to be seen, and more likely to prompt someone to do something to enable its removal. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 13:15, 23 February 2013 (GMT)

(←) Not really Silencer this is more to replace the nearly unused Incomplete tags, since neither Cleanup nor Incomplete tagged pages show in the Task List they never get dealt with, But Stubs get noticed since there is a list of them, but if you go through the Stub lists you'll run into a lot of pages that are either done, or no longer stubs in the sense the tag usually means. For Example if you go through the Skyrim Stubs you'll run into much more Incomplete pages then Stubs. There are over 1300 Skyrim stubs and less then 40 Skyrim Incompletes, some of the Stubs are actually pages where the Incomplete tag got replaced by a Stub tag cause people don't like how the incomplete tag looks. So while Cleanup tends to be used on already finished pages that just need tweaks this would be used to get the partially done pages finished and allow the person placing the stubs to say exactly what else is needed. Lord Eydvar ^{Talk|Contribs} 19:33, 23 February 2013 (GMT)

There's the crux of the problem; there are 1355 articles tagged as stubs in Skyrim, 28 needing cleanup, and 31 "incomplete". At this level a stub tag is merely "white noise" (it's so common you don't even see it). Putting a message in the stub tag to me is futile, nearly every page starts life as a stub (with a stub tag), and a stub notice should be no more than generic message asking for information. If you think something specific to go on a page, why not use the under-used existing templates that would catch the eye, merely because they are so rarely seen. I also don't get your reference to the Task List, both the other templates add categories to the page, and "Pages needing Cleanup" is the 2nd task on the list. Plus the Task List isn't auto-generated, it is tasks that editors feel need particular attention, so if you feel that Incomplete pages need focused on, feel free to add it to the task list. If you feel the Incomplete template is too ugly, I would rather someone attempts to beautify it, before using another template, with a different purpose, in its place. From our article describing stubs "Note: The stub designation is only used for articles, while the {{Incomplete}} tag may be used for either an article or a particular section of an article. Furthermore, while stubs need substantial expansion to the article as a whole, pages with the "Incomplete" notice may only be missing data or statistical information." If anyone has changed an Incomplete tag to a Stub tag, change it back and refer them to this note. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 19:59, 23 February 2013 (GMT)

Yeah I see your point, could we possibly get the Incomplete pages a listing in the Task List since that might help with getting peopel to use it. Lord Eydvar ^{Talk|Contribs} 01:10, 24 February 2013 (GMT)

You can do that yourself by editing that page. Just make sure if you are the one adding incomplete tags to pages that you do so correctly, and if you have questions ask someone more experienced. — ABCface^◥ 15:14, 24 February 2013 (GMT)