Before proposing or creating a new type of stub, please read How to propose a new stub type.

For discussion about creation of stub types or the hierarchy of stub categories,
see Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals.

Archives

Path to Creation 2005-Aug 2006 2006-Jun 2008

Notification templates

I've finally got round to making a suite of templates for notifying the creators of unproposed stub types that their creations have been either sent to SfD or reported on WSS/D. Have a look at {{Sfdnotify1}}, {{Sfdnotify2}} and {{Wssdnotify}} and tell me what you think. It';s likely someone with more technical skill could parameterise the sfd ones so that only one template is needed, but I'll leave that to someone more skilled than I am. Grutness...wha? 01:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Closing sfds

Hi all - I've noticed a couple of different techniques being used for closing sfds, and wonder if there needs to be some standardisation (it's a minor thing, especially in the second case, but I'd be interested in anyone else's views).

Firstly, I usually subst the {{sfd top}} and {{sfd bottom}} templates; some other editors don't. Should these always be subst'ed? They're pretty high-use (currently transcluded on some 350 pages), so I'd think it would be a good idea.

Secondly, where does the {{sfd top}} go - above the header or below it? I tend to prefer putting it above, the same as on Afd, but again some editors tend to put it below the header. If there are good reasons for putting it below I'd be more than willing to change.

Grutness...wha? 01:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm a little late to this discussion, but here are my thoughts: I don't subst, but I probably should. It's a hard habit to break. =) I usually put {{sfd top}} below the header because to me, it seems clearer to read. Also, it makes editing a breeze. And I definitely agree that we should decide on a standard way of closing things. ~ Amalas rawr ^{=^_^=} 20:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)