Template talk:Stub

Icon
The icon for rewrite and possibly stub should be minecraft-themed. This resembles too much other wikis... C ali nou - talk × contribs » 21:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey thanks for telling me this before I spent an hour getting an image for stub. Cool12309(T 22:38, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Compressed version
This template is very small and takes up quite a bit of space at the beginning of a page. Wikipedia's Stub templates does not contain a msgbox and also goes at the bottom of a page, which I think looks much better.

Compare the following:


 * This article is a stub. You can help us by [ expanding it].

The latter is less obtrusive and still gives the same information. Or we could still have it in a compact msgbox:

Thoughts? – Nixinova   07:00, 12 April 2018 (UTC)



Does look better than the one that is used now while providing the same information. jjlr (talk) 07:13, 12 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I definitely support the compact msgbox over the original version, though I'm undecided on whether the compact msgbox or no msgbox is better. However on my phone both the original and compact msgbox take up the entire width of the screen (the text ends normally but the box continues takes up the entire width for some reason), so in this case no msgbox would run into the least issues. - Sonicwave ( talk &#124; edits )  07:20, 12 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I would agree with that but for me the message box makes it seem more noticeable while still feeling like it's self contained. This is a problem i have on wikipedia as well, the stub message blends in and is easier to miss. jjlr (talk) 07:31, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * for the one-line box. - Princess Nightmoon (Splash Water Bottle.pngLingering Water Bottle.png) 07:44, 12 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't really see what the problem is with the stub template we have now - it doesn't really take up that much space, in my opinion. If I were to choose between these two, I would definitely choose the message box one. I really think it's a lot more noticeable if it's in a message box and more consistent with other notice templates. There's not really any reason to not include it in a message box, except to be consistent with "Wikipedia" - honestly, though, I like having a message box better than how Wikipedia puts their stubs.-- Madminecrafter12 Orange Glazed Terracotta JE2 BE2.png to meLight Blue Glazed Terracotta JE1 BE1.png 12:24, 12 April 2018 (UTC)


 * . If this template is intended to be used on very short pages, than it would appear anyway with little to no scrolling needed. However, since all stub templates will have to be moved to the bottom of pages to be consistent with Wikipedia, I think it would be better to shorten the message box.Fadyblok240 (talk) 16:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * this would be against the msgbox use guide, and wikipedia now uses a msgbox to  make it more visible MetalManiacMc at your service fellow human! (talk) 06:01, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Edit request
Hi everyone! I having plan to add a info image to this template, but it is protected, and I cannot do it, please can a sysop add info image to the template so the template can be gooder?  psl85  &#9742; Talk  12:59, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Merge
Should we merge this with template:Stub section and just add a section parameter? MetalManiacMc at your service fellow human! (talk) 17:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I that actually. It makes more sense than having splitted templates. Thejoaqui777 (talk) 02:25, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It only seems to make sense because both templates have the word "stub" in them, which was not always the case when the section template was named expand section, which is more intuitive than the current name. Fadyblok240 (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * since that would make the template more complicated, and the templates are used for different purposes. Fadyblok240 (talk) 23:38, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ugh no, all other templates use that. It would make it way simpler. MetalManiacMc at your service fellow human! (talk) 05:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If we simplified the code then articles with short sections would be categorized in Category:Stubs rather than Category:Articles to be expanded, and we wouldn't want to go back to the old system when long articles would be placed in the stub category because of one incomplete section.Fadyblok240 (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily, you can extremely easily use a different category for a section or not ! MetalManiacMc at your service fellow human! (talk) 17:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Then the template and its documentation would be more confusing. We shouldn't have a template that is used for two completely different purposes, this is why I split the template before. Fadyblok240 (talk) 17:12, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Some other templates (for example, disclaimer) share the same usage. Merging into one template is good for most users' comprehension. --Ultim _ 0 ( USER  |  TALK  |  CONT  )  06:18, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This template is an exception because articles with stub sections are usually not stubs themselves. Fadyblok240 (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Articles with in development sections are usually not in development themselves MetalManiacMc at your service fellow human! (talk) 13:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)