Wikipedia:The perfect stub article/Test

Stub articles are short articles on Wikipedia. They often need work to make them into bigger, better ones. Many articles on Wikipedia start as a "stub".

Some Wikipedia users do not like "stub" articles because they look like articles, but they have little information. Although some stubs are not liked, they can often become very good articles.

When you make or edit a "stub" article, think about what it can become, and that the article needs to grow so it becomes better. The best way to make other people see the article is by editing it yourself. If you make a small change, your edit will appear on the newest changes page, where many Wikipedia users like to look. If they see an article, and they know something about it, they might add to it. You don't have to do lots of research to start an article which others will want to make bigger, but you should be careful to only add what you know. You should also correct what you know is incorrect (politely). One of the sayings on Wikipedia is that articles should not be "perfect" -- This is because a few small errors attracts readers to help and they often add more. Here are a few suggestions:

Provide a "This is a stub" message by adding {{stub}}. (See Wikipedia:Boilerplate text for more.)
Inform users who look at Wikipedia often that there is work to be done by adding a link to Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub into your stub article. Many users look at the Newest Changes page, but if your stub goes off the screen before anyone makes a change, it helps to have a more long-term sign that more work needs to be done.
Follow the rules of simple English. Write in full, clear sentences.
Give a clear, precise definition or description of your topic. Try to make sure you are not too exact with your description, but also make sure you are as exact as you should be. For articles about concrete things (for example, about people, countries, and cities), it isn't possible to define something, so begin with a clear, helpful, description of the subject that tells you about it. For a person, say why he or she is famous. For a place, say where it is and wht people know it. For an event, write its basic details and when it happened. A good description may encourage other writers by letting them know indirectly. For example, Salvador Allende was the President of Chile from 1970 until 1973 would be a good description.
Try to give a little more than just brief facts. You can be provocative, as long as you try to be balanced and correct. If your start makes someone want to read further, then it may get someone to write more. As little as one extra sentence can turn a good description into a very good stub, e.g. Salvador Allende was the President of Chile from 1970 until 1973. The CIA might have been part of the military revolt that put him out of post. With a start like that, you don't have to know any more yourself; others will want to fill in the details.
Make sure any relevant linkable words have been linked. But be careful about which words you link to; see naming conventions. e.g. Salvador Allende was the President of Chile from 1970 until 1973. The CIA might have been involved in the military revolt that put him out of government.
Submit the article with a Summary comment that will interest others to your stub. If nothing else, cut and paste the stub itself into the Summary comment space when you save your article.
Feel you own your stub article. If nobody contributes to your stub for a few weeks, try to expand it yourself. If nothing else, try to make it a better stub.

It is possible to follow these rules without writing a long article. Two sentences will do fine for a good stub--as long as they're two good sentences. The extra thought needed will pay off with a better chance that you get the ball rolling.

If you want to contribute something positive, and you can't write the whole article yourself, then at least let your contribution be an implicit invitation to participation.

Pending: Should a non simple article be added (taken from normal English Wikipedia) expecting for others to simplify it?

My view on this last point is yes provided there are no more than 25 non-simple articales at any time in Simple waiting to be simplified --BozMo |talk 14:08, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)