Wikipedia talk:Stop writing

3?
Where does the number three come from here? WP:GNG calls for multiple which is generally understood to be two or more and that's the definition we use at WP:AFD. WP:AFC acceptance is tied to what would be WP:LIKELY to survive AFD. ~Kvng (talk) 14:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I was going to go with "3 or more", or "at least 3", but wanted to stay away from vagueness (a common complaint from folks new to wikipedia ways).  Are there any essay/guideline that discuss specific # of refs?  I think 3 is a good, safe concrete number for a simple essay such as this.  --  1Wiki8 ........................... (talk) 14:38, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * My understanding that multiple means two or more comes from my WP:AFD and WP:AFC reviewer experience. WP:GNG is where multiple is used. There is a footnote with additional guidance. I have looked for more specific policy on this and have not found it yet. Three is your opinion and I assume you come by this because it is one more than the absolute minimum requirement and so should be safe. You would be in line with policy if you changed three to multiple ~Kvng (talk) 13:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Stubs for creation
Stubs for creation (SFC) is a proposed task force for Articles for creation. SFC will assist new editors in creating useful stubs on notable subjects. Please feel free to discuss and expand on the idea at Draft:Stubs for creation. Cheers! -- 1Wiki8 ........................... (talk) 08:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)