Difference between revisions of "Talk:Shardhammer"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Voidbinder (talk | contribs) |
WeiryWriter (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
::Is it possible that an article can be a stub and still contain all the available information on it's subject? Then would it still be appropriate to have that comment? --[[User:Voidbinder|Voidbinder]] ([[User talk:Voidbinder|talk]]) 19:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC) |
::Is it possible that an article can be a stub and still contain all the available information on it's subject? Then would it still be appropriate to have that comment? --[[User:Voidbinder|Voidbinder]] ([[User talk:Voidbinder|talk]]) 19:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
| + | |||
| + | :If an article has all of the current relevant knowledge then it should get marked as {{t|complete}}.--[[User:WeiryWriter|WeiryWriter]] ([[User talk:WeiryWriter|talk]]) 19:48, 27 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 19:48, 27 February 2015
Missing information?
Why does every article seem to have the "This article is missing information" comment? --Voidbinder (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- That notice appears on every page marked as a
{{stub}}. Which is one of four article classifications (the others being{{complete}},{{good}}, and{{exemplary}}) that we admins use to keep track of quality on the Coppermind. If you believe an article to no longer be a stub please bring it to our attention and we'll look it over and update the tag.--WeiryWriter (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Is it possible that an article can be a stub and still contain all the available information on it's subject? Then would it still be appropriate to have that comment? --Voidbinder (talk) 19:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- If an article has all of the current relevant knowledge then it should get marked as
{{complete}}.--WeiryWriter (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2015 (UTC)