User talk:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Tagging of stubs[change source]

Please do not tag articles of years in the future as history stubs. History is about the study of the past. Chenzw  Talk  03:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Removing categories and interwiki links from userspace pages[change source]

About this change and similar ones I've seen you do: instead of removing categories and/or interwiki links when you find them on userspace pages, please just disable them. That way, the person working on the page won't have to re-do them later. You disable them by putting a colon right after the two left square brackets. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:35, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Your list of potential business stubs[change source]

Just a note: you might want to remove the headings so that we can see the total number of articles. Also, how about creating an account for yourself? WP:WHY has a list of advantages to having your own account. Also, that list probably shouldn't stay in the space it's in, and you could put it in userspace. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Multiple stub tags[change source]

Hello. Could you please make use of {{multistub}} instead of placing multiple stub tags on a single page? Thank you. Osiris (talk) 04:12, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Tried it, didn't work. (talk) 16:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
That's because you didn't really combine the tags. Look at the change I made to Paracel Islands to see how to do it. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:12, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Due to your change, only the geo tag is currently showing. The Asia stub tag is not showing up. (talk) 17:14, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
It's not supposed to show up. Only the first one shows up in the visible text, but the article is in both categories. That's what we want. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:04, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Exactly, you pick the tag that is most appropriate and you put it in the first slot and then that is the one what will show up. The others will not show up and will only place the article in the appropriate category. As mentioned to you before we use stubs differently here than on other wikis. -DJSasso (talk) 17:29, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

You're still putting multiple stub tags on pages, such as Mymensingh District. Please stop and use template {{multistub}} as we have asked. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:36, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for using {{multistub}} now, and I forgot to say thanks for all the stub sorting you're getting done! That has been needed for quite a while! --Auntof6 (talk) 03:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
There wouldn't have been any kind of problem with multistub if someone would have gone through this category before instead of leaving it for someone else.
What are you trying to say? Chenzw  Talk  04:20, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
To be honest for a long time we wanted most of these stubs to only be tagged with stub. As has been mentioned to you we generally only sort them when there is someone actively working on them. Sorting them for the sake of sorting them is often something we frown on. -DJSasso (talk) 12:07, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Well, I would have encouraged leaving a lot of those you've "sorted". Some just don't fit into the categories we have available and I think it would have been better to leave the plain stub tag on. I tag articles as stubs regularly, but even though I know all of the categories, sometimes I consciously choose the plain stub tag because it's a stretch to apply any of the more specific tags. Cloister in religion? How does that help anybody? And now if somebody wants to create an "art" or even an "architecture" stub category, it's more difficult to find... Osiris (talk) 21:10, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Exactly that was the point I was trying to make. In alot of cases we want the plain stub tag. -DJSasso (talk) 11:45, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013[change source]

Information.svg Please use the preview button as to not have to many changes when you test out the stubs. Thank you. Reception123/Receptie123 (talk) 16:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the change, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
  • Personally, I like to see a double line space before a stub notice, so as to separate it clearly from the text material. Same for other templates. Readability of texts on normal computer screens is not good (contrast, for example, with Kindle): it helps the reader to have a space between different kinds of communication. Regards, Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:14, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
  • I would like to see you doing as I suggest: template material should be separated from page content material, for the reason I gave above. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:19, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Stub sorting[change source]

Thanks again for the stub sorting you've been doing. A couple of notes:

  • Anything related to plants, animals, or any other living thing fits better under biology stubs than science stubs.
  • You may have noticed that I reverted the change to West Nile virus, where you changed the stub category from science to medicine. I changed it to biology. A virus is a living organism. It would exist whether or not we had the area of study called medicine, so I think it fits better under biology stubs.

Feel free to ask if you have any questions about this. Thanks again! --Auntof6 (talk) 04:32, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Wikipedia:Simple Stub Project/Business stubs[change source]

An editor has requested deletion of Wikipedia:Simple Stub Project/Business stubs, an article you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Please comment on the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2013/Wikipedia:Simple Stub Project/Business stubs and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also change the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. Chenzw  Talk  02:35, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Stub sorting[change source]

I have had to revert a few of your edits already:

  • [1] - While the company is based in the US, this does not mean that the article is about the United States itself.
  • [2] - same reasoning as above.
  • [3] - Stamp Acts are still passed in some countries today.

Please slow down with your tagging. Your editing speed is approaching bot-like levels. Also do tell us how you go around classifying articles as stubs of a certain type. Do you have a criteria for this? Chenzw  Talk  13:58, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

My "criteria" for this is to look at an article, see if it fits into the stub categories already existing, then add the appropriate tag as needed. (talk) 14:00, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
They do not. Can you please review the above 3 edits, for example? Chenzw  Talk  14:00, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

A stub about an European firm is not a stub about Europe. We do not have another stub template for companies. Please leave {{stub}} as it is. Chenzw  Talk  14:56, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I know that we do not currently have a company stub template, which is why I included it with the Europe category, since it is located in Europe. Also, I know stamp acts are still being passed currently. But there is no "current events" stub tag and the article also deals with historical events, such as the 18th century British/US stamp acts, which is why I included the history tag as one of the stub tags. (talk) 16:05, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
No. Leave {{stub}} as it is. Please cease and desist. Chenzw  Talk  04:27, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Presumably these stub categories exist for a reason: it is for stubs to be placed into them. If you think that seperating stubs into the various appropriate categories is such a problem, then nominate the categories and stub templates for deletion. (talk) 04:29, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I don't think you are quite getting what I mean. There is no issue with sorting stubs. However, there is an issue with sorting stubs into inappropriate categories. Like I mentioned, stubs about European firms should not be sorted into stubs about Europe (the region). Chenzw  Talk  05:03, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I think the IP has completely failed to grasp how we use stubs here even though people have tried and tried to explain. It is preferable for us to have a stub just use the {{stub}} template when there is not an exact stub template for it. A Europe geography stub would not belong on a European company for example. -DJSasso (talk) 17:05, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Except we don't have a Europe geography stub, which would be Europe-geo-stub. What we have is Europe-stub, which is "for use with anything about Europe". I know I have put that tag on things in Europe just as this user has. You and Chenzw apparently think it's only for certain things related to Europe, but that's not what the definition says. Can either or both of you please explain your thinking? --Auntof6 (talk) 17:23, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Technically all the "region" stubs are geo stubs if you look at the list. People have been using them for everything and generally I don't remove them if people do use them. But they are meant for Geo stubs. The two that had geo added were specifically cause there were so many of a non-geo type added. Edit: I forgot that at some point I added the word Countries & to the heading because so many people were using them wrong. So I suppose they aren't just geo now, but that was their intention. I would note that the description you quote is "for use with anything about Europe" (bolding mine). An article about a firm that is based in Europe isn't about Europe. -DJSasso (talk) 17:57, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Since the Europe tag doesn't have "geo" as part of its name, then it is not restricted to only geo articles. (talk) 03:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Having geo in its name or not doesn't change the fact that an article about a company based in Europe is not an article about Europe which is the stated purpose of the stub. -DJSasso (talk) 14:01, 14 November 2013 (UTC)