Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting

How stub templates interfere with a certain script

Template:Formerly

OK, that's perhaps an overdramatic way of describing a rather obscure complaint. However, many stub templates prevent articles appearing on User:Mr.Z-man's excellent tool for finding articles that lack images. The reason for this is that the tool looks up a database that records any usage of images in the article, not just Image: and File: but within templates and message boxes. This meant that pretty much any stub did not appear on lists generated by the tool, because it saw the picture in the stub template and assumed it depicted the subject of the article.
After I pointed this out, Z-man said that rewriting the code to use a different database wasn't really an option, but he has just changed the tool so that there's now an option to only look for JPEGs in articles. It's not perfect, but it works well enough as long as none of the stub templates contains a JPEG. I've been taking photos of central London lately, and found that just swapping JPGs for SVGs in the stub templates for London roads, structs and railway stations allowed >90% of articles without images to show up in Z-man's lists. However there is a long tail of other stub templates that can be placed on geotaggable articles, particularly in Category:Building and structure stubs and more generally in Category:Geography stubs.
Personally I find that JPG photos are usually unintelligible at the 30px size typical of stub templates, and I also think SVG cartoony images are better on style grounds for meta stuff like stub templates to contrast with the JPGs in the article content. The clincher has to be that it doesn't make much difference for stub purposes what the image is, but it makes a critical difference to a tool that helps make Wikipedia better. I'm not necessarily saying that someone should go out and change all the JPGs to SVGs immediately (although it would be nice, particularly on the members of Category:Church stubs relevant to London <g> ) but it should be something to bear in mind when creating new stub templates.Le Deluge (talk) 11:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Erm, i think that is a bad idea, he [the bot/script] should just go though a list then us use a list of stub templates to work out which pages need to be ruled in/out of the list. Peachey88 ^{(Talk Page · Contribs)} 09:45, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't really see the point — presumably most stubs lack images, and in most cases that's bottom of the priority list for fixing. (Note that lots and lots of excellent, complete articles neither have nor need images, if they're on academic subjects that happen to be difficult to visualize.) --Trovatore (talk) 10:02, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I find these responses rather depressing, it's almost as though Peachey88 and Trovatore don't want stubs to be improved. We're talking about the subset of articles that are geotagged, which means that almost always they have a physical manifestation - we're not talking Dialectics here, but churches and statues and office blocks. I don't think you can really say much about priorities, an image really can be worth 1000 words, and an image would be regarded as a prerequisite for getting a WP:GA for this kind of article. And, critically, someone who knows about the subject may not be able to get a free-licence photo, and vice versa. You can imagine an Australian cricket historian writing about the history of the home of cricket, or a Canadian music fan writing about the club where Paul McCartney met Linda and where Hendrix played a famous gig, but finding it hard to find photos of the sites short of spending $100's on flying to London. Whereas I already have a notable site in Kingly St on my list of "photos to take", and if I'm aware of others needed in the vicinity it's a trivial effort to take the photo, even if I have no particular knowledge of the old-time London club scene that would allow me to contribute to the words in the article.

As I said, Z-man has already indicated that fixing it at the script end would entail a major rewrite that he's not prepared to do. And as I also said, the bot is only one reason to move away from JPGs in stub templates - they're generally so small as to be illegible, and I think "cartoony" SVGs are more appropriate for meta templates in any case. Le Deluge (talk) 12:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

"that he's not prepared to do" and others are apparently not prepared to do what you are proposing. I think it's a bit of wasted effort as well. Why not just use another list of stub articles and wade trough those as well ? I'm assuming most won't have a relevant image either. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:16, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree with DJ here. Making some peculiar changes to images because a tool doesn't do something properly isn't a good way to go about this. One could scan a the stubs looking for Image: / File: in the wikitext. Section retitled. –xeno^talk 14:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Stub categories are project categories

You lot may be interested in an essay that I wrote: User:Alan Liefting/Essays/Stub categories are project categories. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 09:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

stubs and "Uncategorised"

If an article has a sorted stub tag but no other categories, should it also have {{Uncategorised}}? I argue that it shouldn't, as the stub tag puts it into a stub category which has a parent non-stub category so that the article is now within a category. I don't know whether there's chapter and verse on it one way or the other? PamD (talk) 17:36, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

There is also {{Uncategorized stub}}. Jason Quinn (talk) 16:58, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Question about - Template:Christian-radio-station-stub

Would it be OK to put the above Stub under Radio stations and Christianity, or if not which one should it go under? --kathleen wright5 (talk) 06:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Albums stubs

I've proposed some new album stub templates that will reach 60. I just need someone to make them. It's far past the required amount of time, but I've proposed new templates for these things multiple times in the past and they never happened because nobody stepped in. I'm not making an account just for this, but I will do all the work. I just would appreciate it if those templates were made. Thanks. 174.98.251.19 (talk) 03:26, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Stub_types/Culture#Albums --AllyUnion (talk) 23:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Any ideas on beauty pageants?

I don't often feel defeated by a stub, but can't think how to stub-sort Miss World 2011! Any ideas? PamD (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

"Repairing" the stub types list.

Just a heads up. I took the entire list of stub types by size found here, ignoring the small categories (60 and under, no subcategories). I've matched this up to the list of stub types found here. Anything that was not found, I have sorted in my own sandbox, and I am working on adding to this list. I'm trying to list everything in logical places, as much as possible, without double-listing much. I would appreciate another set of eyes looking in from time to time to make certain this list is being built appropriately. (Note: This task is partially a personally-enforced penance for building a number of stub categories without listing them on the stub types page.) Dawynn (talk) 00:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Stub sorting on italian wikipedia

Hi, i'd like to add some new stub categories on italian wikipedia, but i didn't find the right way to do it. Someone can tell me if the procedure here indicated is valid for the others wiki too? Thanks a lot.Ciaurlec (talk) 22:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Deprecated stub templates

A few deprecated stub templates have just appeared again at WP:SFD, owing to confusion about the fact that deprecated non-stub templates are usually deleted. To remedy this, I've created {{Stubdeprecated}}, to replace {{Tdeprecated}} on deprecated stub templates, and an equivalent category (Category:Deprecated stub templates), plus made a note at WP:DOT about why deprecated stub templates are usually jkept. Please have a look at them and make any necessary improvements! :) Grutness...wha? 00:01, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Duplicate stubs: Falls County, Tx

I've found articles placed directly in Category:Falls County, Texas stubs; and articles which are in there because they transclude {{FallsCountyTX-geo-stub}}. I have also found a template {{FallsTX-geo-stub}} which I believe duplicates the purpose of {{FallsCountyTX-geo-stub}}. What is the procedure to follow? --Redrose64 (talk) 18:43, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I've redirected one template into the other, so that's solved - as for the direct adding of the category, that should never ever be done, and I've nominated the category for deletion at WP:SFD, as it is considerably undersized. Categories should never be added by hand- they should be replaced by the appropriate template and (if it seems to be happening a lot from just one editor) leave a note on the editor's talk page asking them not to do that (point them to WP:STUB, which tells editors how to mark stubs). Directly adding categories makes for a nightmare if and when categories are reorganised, and also makes it far harder to judge sizes of categories which need splitting/templates which need their own categories. In this case, it seems to have been a new category created "out of process" by the editor involved, and is clearly not of normal WSS standard, so nominating the category for deletion makes more sense. Grutness...wha? 22:18, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately I can't inform the relevant editor, since I don't know who it was: Category:Falls County, Texas stubs has been depopulated.

For some months now I've been working through Wikipedia:Database reports/Stubs included directly in stub categories, and for each, I remove the stub cat and either: (a) if the talk page suggests Start-class or better - do nothing else; (b) if the stub cat concerned has a stub template which is directly relevant, I add that; (c) if the stub cat concerned is of a general nature, but has a more specific sub-cat which is applicable, I take the relevant stub template for the sub-cat and add that.

If I find persistent adding of stub cats w/o use of template (most of the articles in Category:Coal mining regions in the United Kingdom were among these, which I've now fixed), is there a suitable template message which I can issue? I don't see anything directly relevant in Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:42, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Mmmm. No there isn't - perhaps I should make one up... Didn't know about that database report, it looks very useful -I'll add that to the project's "To Do" list as well. Grutness...wha? 22:46, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

There is one now - {{uw-directcat}}. Grutness...wha? 23:23, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Image size in stubs

Hi. I frequently come across stubs with largely varying image sizes from one another. Which is quite ugly. Why not have a fixed image size for all stubs, maybe 30x30px? Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 13:54, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The default is 40x30, although each template can be set individually to allow for particularly long or wide images to be accommodated. Can you give examples of the varying sizes and I'll check them out? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Yup - most are 40x30 which is regarded as pretty much the standard (and as Martin said, is set as the default). For reasons of format shape 35x35 and 30x40 are not uncommon and some (e.g., {{Chile-geo-stub}} understandably need other sizes. I tend to use a rule of thumb for unusually-shaped icons of AxB where A+B=70. Any single dimension beyond 50px is definitely getting too large, though. Grutness...wha? 21:23, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. Why is it a bad idea to put up a strict rule to gave a 30x30 squared image on all stubs templates? Because, pages with multiple stub templates looks somewhat ugly (example). Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 00:22, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Most geo-stubs use maps, most generic national stubs use flags. If you want to suggest that every country changes its flag and national boundaries, go ahead :) Grutness...wha? 07:35, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I think fixing the height at 30px might work. The Chile example is obviously smaller but still visible. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:43, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

It might be visible, but it's far harder to tell what it's meant to be on a small screen. Grutness...wha? 22:36, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, my idea was actually to propose all stubs to look something like this; nice, small, and squared. ;) Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 13:33, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, and it won't work, for the reasons mentioned, unfortunately :) Grutness...wha? 22:36, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah... ;) Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 01:30, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Delinking of templates

Hi folks - does anyone know what's going on with the de-linking of text in stub articles? It seems that User:Colonies Chris has started mass delinking of hundreds of templates. I don't remember that having been discussed here, and I would have thought that it was counterproductive. Grutness...wha? 22:28, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

See WT:STUB#Valueless links in stub templates and his talk page. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:50, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

There is an instance where he has broken the template, so I think advice needs to be provided on what he is doing.

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Currencies_of_Asia&oldid=398418745 200.77.0.177 (talk) 16:01, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Multiple stub templates on the same page?

Most stub articles I come across have more than one stub template. The main message of a stub template is to convey "this is a short article, please expand". So, taking this article as a random example, further stubs like {{TyumenOblast-geo-stub}} and more may also qualify; all conveying the same "this is a short article, please expand".

Perhaps there should be a new rule on one stub per page? Instead of posting "this is a short building article, please expand", "this is a short structure article, please expand", "this is a short building in Japan article, please expand", it'll keep on going, all on the same page... Rehman 02:28, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Not sure how many times this has been discussed in the past but it's at least in double figures. The main purpose of a stub template is not to add a message - it is to categorise stubs into a place where editors will find it. The message, though important, is incidental. As such, it's often vital for stubs to have multiple templates on a page, since they're likely to be within the interest area of several groups of editors. This is why the standard rule is for up to a maximum of four stub templates per page to be appropriate (see WP:STUB for details). Grutness...wha? 04:05, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh. Then how about making it a bit nearer? Maybe it would be near-impossible, but wouldn't it be neater if a general template be implemented? Example:

{{Stub|1= |2= |3= |4= }}

Where filling in the relevant subject name (i.e. Power station) in field 1, would give the power station stub notice. And for multiple stubs, the remaining three fields. We could also embed auto categorization or any other feature into it, including the lead image.

And if necessary, each type of stub could be given a unique ID (like {{Wikipedia ads}}), which could be used for easy filling of the fields. Rehman 08:36, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

As I said, this has been discussed on many many occasions in the past, and that suggestion has been made on several occasions. Basically, it would make the whole stub scheme unmanageable and would make both stub sorting and stub tagging a nightmare, plus making it impossible to judge which stubs had been officially created and which hadn't, and how many stubs were connected to each stub type in upmerged categories. Autocategorisation would render the whole scheme of upmerging and threshold limits impossible as well. It would also mean there was one parametered template in use on some 750,000 articles, with the associated server risks if it needed to be altered, compared to the current scheme which deliberately limits the number of articles for each template. No offence, but please check the archives of this page before suggesting something like this, because we've gone over it many, many times. Grutness...wha? 08:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I understand. Sorry for spamming here and not going through the archives ;) Thanks for taking the time to respond. Kind regards. Rehman 09:05, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

If you come across cases where the same pair of stub templates appear on a large number of different pages, you may raise a request (at WP:WSS/P) for a new stub type which overlaps both.

For example, there is {{Rail-station-stub}}, which is for railway stations anywhere, and there is {{UK-rail-stub}}, which is for railway topics in the UK; and there is also {{UK-railstation-stub}}, which covers the overlap: railway stations in the UK.

Similarly, there is {{Steam-loco-stub}}, which is for steam locomotives anywhere, and there is {{US-rail-stub}}, which is for railroad topics in the USA; but there isn't a stub category which covers both with a single template; so, in the absence of that, an article on a steam locomotive in the USA should be given both templates. At some point, if we found that there were a significant number of articles with both of these, we might consider that a new template {{US-steam-loco-stub}} was desirable. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Improperly created stub template

I think that {{Welsh-Academics}} has been created improperly. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:27, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion#.7B.7BWelsh-Academics.7D.7D --Kslotte (talk) 15:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)