Zoney wrote:
Indeed. For a start, many new articles are stubs, and
for stubs, I
prefer the following format, rather than sections on a short article:
:''See also:'' [[Article a]], [[Article b]]
:''External links:'' [[site a]], [[site b]]
For an example of this format, check many of the towns listed on
[[List of towns in the Republic of Ireland]] (the talk page to-do list
lists the stub ones specifically).
It's a matter of taste, yes.
Also, I would consider it optimistic at best to expect
references for
the more humdrum stub articles. I'm not discouraging the practice of
encouraging references - but for stubs - which mostly just relate
basic information, contributors shouldn't be beaten with the "provide
references" mantra.
If they know what a stub is, they can remove the template. Remember that
I'm just thinking of some preloaded wikitext here.
Even beyond stubs, to shorter/average size articles,
this may be the case.
That I would question, actually. I don't write a three-para new article
these days without at least an external link. The template doesn't force
a section to be filled in, it just tries to get across that this is a
good idea.
Hmm. How would you write such a preloaded text? I was thinking in terms of
an outline for beginners to write something that wasn't crap, not something
to be used as a constraint on those who know what they're doing.
"The format below is suggested but not compulsory."
- d.