Disputatio Vicipaediae:Pagina

E Vicipaedia

[recensere] Noli creare stipulas ???

Duriorem esse censeo qui stipulas scribi vetat. Nam: 1.)Paene nemo vetitum istud observat.

2.)Stipulae nonnullae me impepulerunt, ut scriberim. Nonnumquam ignoravissem, qua de re scripturus essem, nisi quaedam stipula fuisset.

3.)Virtus eximia, ut scitis, linguae Latinae est brevitas, vitium aliarum linguarum Vicipaediarum autem nimia abundantia verborum vel redundantia. Itaque paginae Vicipaediae Latinae semper breviores erunt aliarumque linguarum Vicipaediis.

4.)Causa altera breviorum paginarum: Numero usorum minore et numerus singulorum, de quibus paginae docent, minor est.

Equidem censeo stipulas esse appellandas tantum paginas unicae sententiae, neque stipulas vetandas.--Iovis Fulmen 09:43, 17 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Credo has "commendationes" (quas non scripsi, sed aliunde pastavi) id ipsum esse, "commendationes" et minime "regulas". Et ego frequenter stipulas creo ... semper rediturus, semper longiora scripturus ... ! Andrew Dalby 11:49, 17 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
Gratias, et pro commentationibus sequentibus.--Iovis Fulmen 21:53, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

[recensere] Comments copied across from Disputatio Vicipaediae:Latinitas

... I think we should appreciate stubs as long as they have an interwiki link. Such stubs map the Latin language to other languages. They could be seen as an invitation to join. We should not be distressed by them. We cannot be an encyclopaedia at the moment. This is a work in progress. Stubs with interwiki links (!) are a tool, not a pain. They link us to other languages and possible contributors. Do not misunderstand me: Stubs without an interwiki link are a pain. They do not attract anybody, they should be avoided. Page Vicipaedia:Pagina says "Noli creare stipulas!". This might be ok for Wikipedias with a lot of native speakers. We should have another strategy. Stubs with interwiki links (!) should be appreciated. We should rethink this "Noli creare stipulas!", at least be more specific ... -- Rolandus 12:17, 18 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

... I agree with this very strongly. They also build up the whole multilingual quality of Wikipedia. I have often added stubs to other-language Wikis for exactly this reason ... Andrew Dalby 13:11, 18 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
The Interwiki stubs are great and I, myself, was brought here by an interwiki to something small and obscure. But I think that what Ioscius said about one-line stubs being a nuisance is also true. Stubs are fine and most articles I create and most here are. But "X est urbs in Y (circiter ... incolarum)" is just pointless. The articles should have at least 1 fact that the reader may not already know. --Harrissimo 16:24, 18 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
I am all for stubs too. But as I said ealier somewhere, it's pointless to rate stubs for Latinitas. Neander 17:58, 18 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
And thanks for these opinions. I am fully satisfied if this is communis opinio, including Harrissimo's fine remark about not-even-stubs, which clearly belong somewhere else. (I believe there are even pages of this kind that manage to include language mistakes, to link this back to the Latinitas discussion...)--Iovis Fulmen 21:56, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)