Talk:Stephanie Nguyen (politician)

Stub or Start?
User:Banana Republic reverted my removal of the stub stag. My removal followed my reassessment of the article as "start" using the rater tool, which I find to be a useful and impartial ways of rating articles.

I don't have a strong feeling about this, but did want to at least mention that my assessment was supported by the assessment tool, which I think is common way to assess articles on Wikipedia.

I doubt anyone would disagree that the article needs expansion, but that is not synonymous with being a stub. (talk) 14:53, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I've never heard of the distinction between "start" and "stub". Is there an essay you could point me to? Banana Republic (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:ASSESS is the relevant guideline. I find the examples part to be the most useful part. But honestly, rather than try to implement subjective criteria, I just use the rater tool and that way I feel confident I can say I assessed without favour or bias.
 * Details about the rater tool (which I highly recommend) are here User:Evad37/rater CT55555 (talk) 15:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Do we have a some other template to substitute for the template? Banana Republic (talk) 15:46, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Normally, I think we don't template things once they get out of the stub range. I find the best two ways to get articles improved is to mention in discussions at WikiProjects WP:WOMRED or at WP:ARS. CT55555 (talk) 15:57, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Judging by the examples listed at WP:ASSESS, it seems that this article is closer to a stub than a start. But as you pointed out, that's subjective. Regardless, I think it's a good idea to put the stub template in the article, or something else in the article, to encourage readers to add to the articles. Banana Republic (talk) 17:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)