Bureaucrats, checkuser, owners, Administrators
310
edits
Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Question about stubs
Tyteen4a03 (talk | contribs) |
Tyteen4a03 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
If a page only has a sentence or two for its content, but its canonical source only references it briefly, would it still be called a stub? BB thinks it is, but I'm not so certain. What do the admins think? [[User:Emerald141|Emerald141]] 17:56, 29 May 2011 (CDT) | If a page only has a sentence or two for its content, but its canonical source only references it briefly, would it still be called a stub? BB thinks it is, but I'm not so certain. What do the admins think? [[User:Emerald141|Emerald141]] 17:56, 29 May 2011 (CDT) | ||
:When a page is a stub it means that it lacks information, not that it is short. Hence the "This page is a stub. You can help WonderWiki by expanding it.". [[User:Fuzboto|Fuzboto]] 18:31, 30 May 2011 (CDT) | |||
When a page is a stub it means that it lacks information, not that it is short. Hence the "This page is a stub. You can help WonderWiki by expanding it.". [[User:Fuzboto|Fuzboto]] 18:31, 30 May 2011 (CDT) | ::The guy who invented the wiki word 'stub', Jimmy Wales (founder of Wikipedia) phrases it like this: | ||
The guy who invented the wiki word 'stub', Jimmy Wales (founder of Wikipedia) phrases it like this: | |||
"A stub is an article containing only a few sentences of text which — though providing some useful information — is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject, and which is capable of expansion." | "A stub is an article containing only a few sentences of text which — though providing some useful information — is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject, and which is capable of expansion." | ||
While it may be that there isn't much canonical reference material, I think my recent edit to [[Mayor Scarredy]] proves that there's always something to add. Also, you're not the definitive source on either WonderWiki or Wonderland- I was asking the admins, not you. [[User:Emerald141|Emerald141]] 15:27, 31 May 2011 (CDT) | While it may be that there isn't much canonical reference material, I think my recent edit to [[Mayor Scarredy]] proves that there's always something to add. Also, you're not the definitive source on either WonderWiki or Wonderland- I was asking the admins, not you. [[User:Emerald141|Emerald141]] 15:27, 31 May 2011 (CDT) | ||
:::The page was not a stub beforehand; it did not lack the information you have put, but it is better with it of course. [[User:Fuzboto|Fuzboto]] 06:47, 2 June 2011 (CDT) | |||
The page was not a stub beforehand; it did not lack the information you have put, but it is better with it of course. [[User:Fuzboto|Fuzboto]] 06:47, 2 June 2011 (CDT) | :It depends on the context. For example, if you're creating a separate page for each character in a game, minor characters might fit better in the root characters, but if you're creating a separate page about a major element, such as Stinky, then even if the canonical source only references it briefly it deserves its own page with the stub template. I'm sorry that the reply was a year later, but hopefully it sums up what I think. [[User:Tyteen4a03|Tyteen4a03]] ([[User talk:Tyteen4a03|talk]]) 13:58, 27 August 2012 (CDT) | ||