Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub improvement/Backlog of the week/1

Stubs that were

Most of the articles listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub improvement/Backlog of the week/1#Priority stubs aren't actually stubs (e.g., they have more than the 1500 bytes that AWB removes tags over, they have more than 10 sentences, they have a developed article structure). What was the method used to identify pages for this list? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:02, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

I sorted Category:Stub-Class Women's History articles by page views using Massviews, and then I removed any that had more than 500 words. I got the 500 words metric from WP:Stub, which gives it as a rough upper limit of what constitutes "no longer a stub". Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:22, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

WP:STUB says "Editors may decide that an article with more than ten sentences is too big to be a stub, or that the threshold for another article may be 250 words. Others follow the Did you know? standard of 1,500 characters in the main text, which is usually around 300 words."

Five hundred words is almost never a stub, which means that most articles with, e.g., 450 words are already not stubs. If you present a list of articles that editors don't recognize as obviously being stubs, then I think they're likely to wander away in confusion. You're already pushing things by requiring one citation per sentence (a standard found nowhere in any policy or guideline, and that has been repeatedly rejected by the community), and presenting a list of mostly non-stubs might be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back.

I want to be clear that I'm not telling you what you should do. I just want to make sure that you're aware of the risks and undertaking them with your eyes open. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:36, 11 October 2023 (UTC)