What are the stub rules on the coppermind?

[WayneSpren he/him]

I want to get started but I don't know what to put as a stub and what to put as "Complete". Could someone please enlighten me?

Edited June 11, 2015 by WayneSlider123

[Chaos he/him]

There are three quality statuses you can apply to Content articles. (Make sure each article has such a thing, right below references.) They are: Stubs, Partially complete, and Complete. To apply them you use {{stub}}, {{partial}}, or {{complete}} respectively.

Mark articles as {{complete}} when you feel that it contains all known content on the subject is in the article. It really is that simple. Using {{complete}} actually puts it in the "nearing completion" category, which means we need to review it. Wiki admins will verify it does indeed contain all knowledge on the subject, and make appropriate style edits. From there it will be in the category of "Complete articles". So completeness is pretty easy: it contains everything, and is effectively finished until new info is released.

Stubs are the lowest on the totem pole. They are basically awful placeholder articles.

If you work on stubs and you add content to them, but are not sure if you've grabbed everything (because only use {{complete}} when you're certain it is done), use the {{partial}} tag in place of {{stub}}. Partially complete articles are articles that are more than one line. Partials don't really have a good definition, honestly. They are longer than stubs but aren't complete yet.

Does that help?

[Arook he/him]

So I have a couple of questions on this. What is the ruling on when placing an update tag can or should we remove the reviewed portion of of the complete tag? It is not really complete anymore at that point. 

 

For quality tags would you say this is a good explanation of who should put what tags down.

 

• (Stub) = all articles created start with this.
• (Partial) = anyone can place this if they feel that has a lot of the information on this subject
• (Complete) = Anyone can place when they feel it has all relevant information to request Admin review
• (Complete|reviewed=yes) = Staff only placement
• (Notable articles) = Staff only placement
• (exemplary) = Staff only placement

[WeiryWriter he/him]

So the {{update}} template is mostly for use when an article was at some point {{complete|reviewed=yes}} but there has been a recent-ish release with relevant information that needs to be added.  Generally when the {{update}} tag is added the "reviewed=yes" should be removed.  If the relevant information is not added by the end of that books spoiler period the article should be demoted to {{partial}} (but the {{update}} will remain).

 

That is a fair description of the tags.  A good rule of thumb for updating stubs to partials is that if the text is longer than the infobox, it should be upgraded.  Keep in mind that this is not an absolute rule.

[Joe ST he/him]

So expanding a little on the stub rules, there's not really a strict boundary between {{stub}} and {{partial}}, as it's hard to reason what the lower limit is. We use two properties to decide but neither are strict or objective. One is, as Weiry stated, the length of the content compared to the infobox. The other is whether the page fits inside the edit box without a scroll bar. We recently moved from the latter to the former as our main criteria, as the latter is affected heavily by the size of the infobox, and also any other templates used, whereas the former relates more to the actual content.

 

Neither are particularly objective since the page width isn't constant over peoples computers. It's not an easy thing to decide, especially for those on the edge. So if you decide to add content to a stub, and end up adding a bunch of paragraphs, then you can definitely go ahead and bump it up to a partial, or even a complete if you think there's no other info around. Please refrain from changing any article you come across which is right on the line, as it would be much better served as a stub so it gets that little extra attention. And any read will know that the article is likely to be missing lots of info, and so may be encouraged to help out.

[Arook he/him]

Thank you  that helps. Would it be OK if I updated the Help:categorization page on quality tags and placed that information in there is a little clearer fashion than it is now? If you would prefer I can Copy the section into my sandbox page and update from there and you can look at it when you feel like it.

[Joe ST he/him]

Please feel free to copy to your sandbox and tweak away, though we are planning on rewriting most of it our selves at some point, to make it easier to use and more helpful.

[Arook he/him]

So I have created a section on my Sandbox page for quality tags and I think it looks rather nice. If you like it please use it to update the Quality tags section though I recommend that notable articles should be placed somewhere else on that page on account of i not being a tag and not having anything to do with quality. I left it in for now you could always leave it and move it later if you wished. If you decide not to use it please let me no so I can just remove it from my page.