[WikiEN-l] Defamatory Biographies - another problem looming forWikipedia?

Wed Dec 21 20:47:49 UTC 2005

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 04:14:33 +0100, Geoff Burling  
<llywrch at agora.rdrop.com> wrote:

<snip>
> (And for the record, when I find an article with more than one stub tag
> attached, I always reduce the number to one. Don't like it? Then turn
> the stub into an article, & we'll both be happy.)
<snip>

Obviously *redundant* stub templates can be removed and replaced with more  
spesific ones. For example if an article is tagged with  
{{US-bio-stub}},{{writer-stub}} and {{US-related-stub}} then the "proper"  
thing do to is to remove all those and add the more spesific  
{{US-writer-stub}} that transport all the same info and those 3 would  
(that's pretty much what the stub sorting project is all about). However  
if the subject of the stub belong in 2-3 different categories it should  
most defenently have a stub tag for each, unless it's a completely trivial  
thing. For example if a politician have also written an auto-biography  
(haven't they all) that only sold 500 copies and no one have ever heard  
about I would naturaly not suggest putting a {{writer-stub}} tag on a stub  
about him/her.

I agree the number should be kept down, but outright removing all but one  
template seems exessive, and is actualy counter productive with the goal  
of having the stub turned into an article. If the choice is between a stub  
with multiple "ugly" tags and a nice clean stub that less people are  
likely to find and expand then I'd go with the ugly stub any day.

-- 
[[User:Sherool]]