User talk:AndrewWatt

Myth Stubs
You wrote: ''Thanks for the mythology stub format on the Enkidu article.... At what point is is fair to remove a stub from a stubbed article, and who decides? I'll continue working on the Enkidu entry, since I'm interested in Sumerian mythology and the Epic of Gilgamesh in particular -- but I am interested in knowing at what point an entry moves from being a stub to being a full article.''
 * Good question... somewhere in the Wikipedia rules there's probably an exact definition of when an article stops bein a stub, but I don't think anyone follows and hard-and-fast rule. Anything that is under a paratraph is definitely a stub, but many things far longer which don't cover all aspects of a topic are stubs as well. I tend to think that if an article fills the "Editing window" twice and isn't simply a list of links then it's no longer a stub, but it's all pretty arbitrary and will also depend on the subject. Enkidu is already close to the two window limit, but at least some more is needed for it to be a well-rounded article.


 * I guess what I'm really saying is that common sense should tell you when an article feels useful enough to be called a "real" article, and when that happens then you can feel free to remove the stub template.


 * One final point, I wouldn't remove a stub template unless the article has at least one category, otherwise it might be difficult to locate for editors in future (In the case of the Enkidu article, it's already in Category: Sumerian mythology, so that's not a concern). Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 00:09, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well that's it for the A stubs for now! It took me a while to figure out that the two of us were sorting stubs at the same time. I was puzzled when I saw a couple articles that had already been changed; but I was working from a cached list... Nice working with you. :)

I left Airstone. No idea where to put it. I thought it was a good example for a 'pet-stub' or 'hobby-stub' maybe. --Bookandcoffee 23:11, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

stubs
why adding three stub tags to a single article? - Omegatron 05:45, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

Oh I see. People go through all the science stubs looking for articles to fix that they know about, etc... - Omegatron 16:39, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)

Further stubs
Things on article pages are for readers. If you want to use multiple stubs perhaps you could put them on the talk pagesGeni 01:34, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)