Template talk:Stub category

message: Question: Wouldn't a better choice of wording of this template be to use "instead of" to replace "rather than"? The wording would then be:
To add an article to this category, use  instead of .
gK ¿? 09:06, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: This template has been protected from vandalism and any disruption from the pages it is currently being used on.  Removing top level categories or editing the template may cause significant or disruptive changes to :Category:Stub categories and should be avoided editing unless discussed here. -- AllyUnion (talk) 08:49, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops.  My intention was to get rid of the clutter in the main :Category:Stub categories page with subcategories relating to specific geographical areas, which have their own parent :Category:Stubs by region.  I must've had a little slip of the brain.  Sorry about that - maybe there's still a way of doing it (and similarly with other nested stub categories)?  (Is it possible to do this by adding a parameter to this template, without breaking existing pages?) -- Smjg 18:45, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, there isn't a specific way to do that.  The easiest way to do that is to make another template, and specify for regional stub categories only.  Like :Template:Regional stub category or something like that. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:31, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  :Template:Regional stub category created.  Invokes this template and adds :Category:Stubs by region.  (SEWilco 06:15, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: Should id="stub" be added to the div tag?  I noticed it being used in some stub references.  (SEWilco 06:20, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought that was just for actual stub messages. This message doesn't designate the category as a stub, it says that stubs are sorted into this category. --Joy [shallot] 11:26, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  id=stub 

message: I notice that this template puts the stub category into it's parent subject category sorted under "µ".  While this is fine, it's a little odd, and this page is where I'd expect to find an explanation for it.  So, if anyone knows; please comment here. Thanks! JesseW, the juggling janitor 03:45, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering about that myself. I've deleted it as making no sense. Blackcap (talk) 00:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I've reverted my edit, and contacted Grm wnr, who added it. My suspicion is that it exists to separate the stub cat from the rest for easy identification. Unless there's a good reason not to, I recommend changing µ to Stubs so that this cat is just as easy to find and is categorized just like everything else. I don't see a reason to have special rules for this 'un. Blackcap (talk) 01:57, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There was discussion of it over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting. The idea was to have something forcing it to the end of the list, to seperate it from the regular categories. --Mairi 02:25, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, that's helpful. O.K., keep as is, then. Best to read the full talk there, JesseW, but in brief, the reason is to force it to the bottom, and µ was chosen due to it being just about the last and it also meaning "very small." Blackcap (talk) 06:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

text: This is because the Stub sorting is still a work in progress. Any stub that doesn't use this template yet, can be considered as not yet 100% verified by the WP:WSS I guess. - The DJ 07:45, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  µ for category sort key? 

message: Should we be using including :Category:Stub categories in all stub categories?  That already has the "very large create subcategories" message on it...  But there already are subcategories, we're simply also forcing them into the top-level category as well.  Should we remove it from here, and re-add it manually to all the "top-level" stub categories?  (Making those rather fewer in number, by adding additional parents, might not be a bad plan either.)  Alai 19:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: how about using noinclude ? What does WP:WSS want to do with this template btw? I see there is not project boilerplate here yet - The DJ 04:10, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category inclusion 

message: Can we use  as below



id:Templat:Stub Category

Thanks—G716 <T·C> 15:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Stifle (talk) 09:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  cmbox 

message: Can the template use an SVG version of the icon, perhaps ? — cBuckley (Talk • Contribs) 15:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please insert the SVG version, as described above. Thank you. --The Evil IP address (talk) 20:33, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

text: Done - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:07, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SVG icon 

message: Hi! Maybe I miss some older discussions, but I cannot find them. So the question is the following. Shouldn't all stub categories be hidden? IMO they are not intended for readers, but more for editors in the same fashion as all other categories which list articles with some flaws. Correct me if I am wrong. --DixonD (talk) 12:23, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It has been discussed before, at least twice with my involvement: one of them was Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 April 6#Category:Stub categories although I don't recall where the other one(s) were - probably one of the village pumps, or a project page directly connected with stubs. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:28, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hidden