FamilySearch Wiki talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types

Template names
Instead of have a stub template for every grouping, for example: ,, &. . . Is there a reason we cannot have these same as one template, such as: ,, & ? This would definitely make it easier to have new groupings, but may not maintain some kind of control that someone may want. It may also have some drawback such as flag display, but that may be got around in another method, at least in many cases. If this is not a possibility, what about the template names be reversed so that they are group alphabetically and maybe easier to find alphabetically, such as: ,, & ? Thomas_Lerman 14:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I understand where you are coming from, but I think using the asbox base template and passing specifics for each separate template is the best way. You hit on the reason why. If each specific stub template is to use a different image then if only one stub template was used it would need to be updated for each variation. As for the naming convention for the stubs why would reversing the order make them easier to find? --Steve 15:30, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I will have to check out the templates, but do not believe flags are that hard to get updated. Wikipedia handles it fine all of the time. Why would reversing the order make it easier??? If someone knows it is a "stub" but do not remember the name, they can find it alphabetically very easily . . . just another way of easily finding things (not everyone uses the categories to find things). Thomas_Lerman 15:05, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * If your not talking about finding things via categories I assume you are talking about searching for them. Either way if a user searches for stub england or england stub they will find the articles. Putting the word stub at the end means that the unique part of the object is given first and follows the pattern that has been used for articles in the main namespace eg. England History, England Probate Records etc. Please let me know if I am missing something when you talk about grouped alphabetically. --Steve 11:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I am not talking about searching, I have seen several go to the alphabetic listing looking for articles. For example, go to all templates starting with the word "stub". It really do not matter too much. I still am not convinced creating potentially 100s or 1000s of templates is the best way to go for these. Thomas_Lerman 17:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

More templates needed
The FamilySearch support group is ready to begin managing the stub articles. In order for them to get started, we need additional templates created for the major localities including country and US states. I noticed there is a process identified for requesting new stub sorting templates, but I don't know if there is a group of individuals who are ready to respond to this request. Eventually we hope the support group will also be able to create the new templates when needed, but that is not the case right now. Until then, we wanted to request a sorting template for each of the US states be created. Naming the templates is less of a concern, but being consistent in the naming is important. I assume we will add each template to the list on the project page, but that list will get very long, very fast. Is there a better way to display the list of sorting templates? Thanks, --Fran 18:29, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * The stub templates for the US states have been created. I have updated this page with a list of them all. Yes the intention is for this page to list the full list of stubs that have been created. If in time you feel that shorter more focused lists are required then I proposed that we create further subpages to this page, following the model adpoted by Wikipedia. See and  to see how they have been organised the lists. --Steve 16:57, 4 August 2010 (UTC)