User talk:Egon^ ^

If for some reason you would like to criticize my behaviour on Wikipedia, please do it without breaking the Etiquette. If you would like to propagand Wikipedia Etiquette, paste this template into your talk page.

Welcome[edit]

Well, Egon^ ^,

I'm very glad you joined the English Wikipedia. We can always use more contributors. Because you already know the rules of Mediawiki, I dropped this note off instead of my usual welcome template. It is included below, disregard all text, just use the links if you wish.

A welcome from P ri mat e #101

Again, thanks for joining.

--Primat e ^#101 01:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Sorry it took me so long to get back to you! I've been very busy.

Now, if you just made a new article, or have made a big edit to one, you can add it at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback. Then, people will come and give you feedback on what it is. For example, if you said "Wikipedia is enjoyed by many people" in the Wikipedia article, other people would tell you if they liked it or not. More instructions are at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback.

I hope this helps!

--Primat e ^#101 04:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

URGENT: Multi-stub on Polish wikipedia[edit]

Please stop using the multi-stub on Polish Wikipedia and delete it ASAP! See comment at WP:WSS/P! Grutness...wha? 13:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Łukasz. The English Wikipedia operates with each stub template using one corresponding stub category. The total number of stubs (300,000-400,000 articles) is the best estimate WP:WSS can come up with. In order to get as many editors working on the material as possible, we try to double-stub or triple-stub articles when relevant. Before we created {{Poland-politician-stub}} , an article could be stubbed with e.g. {{Poland-bio-stub}}, {{Politician-stub}} and {{mil-bio-stub}} . Similar examples to this one can still be found in e.g. the African or South American material. We try to stub articles with both citizenship and profession, to catch the attention of as many editors as possible. Some editors will have heard of a Nigerian football player because he is a football player, others will have heard of him because he is a Nigerian. The estimates are simply based on my experience sorting several thousands of stub articles. Regards. Valentinian ^(talk) 19:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem is simply the large number of (stub) articles on the English Wikipedia. WP:WSS tries to cut down the size of large categories by creating child categories (luckily, we now have the StubSense tool which is great in finding these examples). We usually create a child category whenever we can find 60 articles stubbed with the same combination of nationality and profession. To name an example; seven child categories of {{Poland-bio-stub}} have been created this way. Several of the stub templates are protected from editing because they cause strain on the servers, but the most used of these are only used on a few thousand articles. I'm simply afraid of what will happen with a template used by a lot more articles. Regards. Valentinian ^(talk) 19:41, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're still curious about the numbers of multiple-stubbings: as of the last db dump, there were 5,921 that were triple-stubbed, 554 quadruple-stubbed, and 87 had five or more -- including one 10-stubbed article. Hope that helps. Alai 03:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Multi-stub again[edit]

Hi Łukasz - you wrote: now tell me, honestly: where are any problems whit incorrect names in categories (in normal articles)? No one is using incorrect names for articles now days? Especialy new Wikipedians, don't makes mistakes in that maters?

Well, yes, they do. But if you add a category and save, you notice that what you've added is a redlink. If you add a template and save, you look to see whether the template has saved properly, and are far less likely to notice a red-linked category. And if a person does notice a redlinked category, they're as likely to create the new category as they are to look for the correct name for an existing one. We already have a similar problem with redlinked templates, with people simply making a template if they make a redlink, but it's very easy if we find these to quickly redirect a template to its correct name (in much the same way as it's easy to redirect an article), though - for technical reasons, redirecting categories doesn't work nearly as well. And if we leave the category names as they are without redirecting, they will be nearly ueless for editors looking for particular articles, wince the articles they want could be in any of several categories. Grutness...wha? 01:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again -

Sopose where is Multi-stub in use, and You make something like: {{Multi-stub|||agh|history}}. If categories would be make dynamicly, then stub would paste something like this:

This article is a stub related to history and agh. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

and the word agh would be redlinked...

So how I see it: the problem of incorrect names exist, but it has nothing to idea of Multi-stub. Am I missing something?

Well, currently, a red-link in the template leads to quite a few editors making new templates. This happens a lot, and is a big problem at WP:SFD, but at least it is possible to redirect the new templates simply and quickly. With the multi-stub system, a red-link would require a new category being made to fix it. If the same editors that currently make new templates without thinking started making new categories without thinking, then we'd have a considerable amount of much harder mistakes to fix. Also, there are many sorts of stub-related problems that we can only fix by using the "what links here" page for a particular template. With a multi-stub template, this page would be useless, since it would link to thousands of unrelated stubs. Grutness...wha? 04:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]