Template talk:MetaPicstub

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stub-sorting Wikiproject

This stub-notice is maintained by WikiProject Stub sorting, an attempt to bring some sort of order to Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to improve/expand the articles containing this stub notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

[edit] Current usage

This meta-template can be used to produce a stub message with an image. If you don't want an image in your stub message use Template:Metastub instead. Additionally, you can use this template without the capital P or M: {{subst:metapicstub}}

For example, {{subst:MetaPicstub|article=[[ancient Egypt]]ian article| id=stub | category=ancient Egypt| image=Pharao.png | size=40 | alt=Egyptian Pharaoh}} is a simplified version of Template:Ancient-Egypt-stub. It produces:

Contents


[edit] Alt tag

What happened to the {{{alt}}} parameter? --Phil | Talk 08:40, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)

I removed it, as I explained in the edit summary at the time. Here's a longer explanation, which I gave on my talk page:

  • For example, Template:Bio-stub used to say "David's face This biographical article is a stub" (when viewed in a text browser), and that isn't even a proper sentence. The guideline is: If an image has a caption, then choose a good caption, and don't worry about bad alt text or bad title text; else choose good alt text, and don't worry about bad title text. See Wikipedia:Alternative_text_for_images#Conflict_between_caption_and_alt_text and en:Wikipedia_talk:Extended_image_syntax#Alt.2C_title.2C_and_caption_text_in_extended_markup. The real problem is that there's only one place in the image syntax to specify what should be three different things: a caption (displayed below the image), alt text (displayed by text browsers instead of the image), and a title (displayed as a tooltip by many graphical browsers). You just can't get good tooltips without getting bad alt text, and the alt text is more important for accessibility, so the tooltips suffer. There is a feature request on file asking for the three things to be individually controllable. —AlanBarrett 17:30, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
But there currently is no alt text. (A blank space does not really count as alt text...) -Aranel ("Sarah") 22:20, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
A blank space does count as alt text, and it is the most appropriate alt text in this case. People using text browsers should see, and people using audio browsers should hear, "This ancient Egyptian article is a stub", not something like "Egyptian Pharaoh This ancient Egyptian article is a stub". —AlanBarrett 19:40, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
My understanding of proper HTML (which is a little outdated) has been that there is supposed to be actual alt text, and that a blank space does not "count". However, I do tend to agree that a blank space is better for something that is meant to be purely decorative or to convey a small amount of information in one quick glance. -Aranel ("Sarah") 20:36, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
alt is required. However, setting it to a blank (even alt="") is sufficient, under HTML 4. Smoddy (t) (e) 14:50, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Meta-templates

I have written Wikipedia:Meta-templates considered harmful, with input from User:Jamesday, the main database developer on the project. Meta-templates are basically templates used to commonize the format of yet other templates. One example is Template:Message box. There are a number of problems with using these, which look to outweigh the benefits. -- Netoholic @ 19:33, 2005 Feb 4 (UTC)

What about always using the template with "subst:"? This template isn't actually used all that frequently. The goal is not really to standardize formatting, as far as I can tell, but to make it easier to create new stubs. It tends to be used primarily by a small group of people who could easily be educated to use "subst:" with the template. (Something I often do anyway, since it allows for modification of the template text after it is created.)
There is currently a great need for more and better stub organization. Obviously this need will become less pressing over time. -Aranel ("Sarah") 20:03, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Using subst: would be a better approach to creating new xxxx-stub templates, but I have to ask, wouldn't creating lists of stubs by topic area be much better? -- Netoholic @ 20:08, 2005 Feb 4 (UTC)
Lists, unlike categories, are not automated. It is much easier to add a stub tag to an article than to edit its name into a list, and it's difficult to get people to actually remove it from the list once it no longer belongs there. -Aranel ("Sarah") 01:51, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Actually, both Template:MetaPicstub and Template:Metastub were originally protected against vandalism and for the reason you are suggesting above. I don't know when they were unprotected. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:21, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Additionally, I really, really, much prefer to remove these two templates. The reason behind this: the number of templates this can be used per page is limited, thereby limiting Wikipedia:Template messages/Stubs. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:25, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Accually, the 5-use limit on templates has been removed recently, so Wikipedia:Template messages/Stubs now works. — ABCD 18:00, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Only use this template with subst:

Please. I beg you. It's the clear message of the article mentioned in the section above. r3m0t 21:16, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)