If you want to start building a house, why not lay at least a few bricks? |
Not every article comes out of the chute as featured article-class, we all know that. Articles have to grow over time to represent Wikipedia's best work. There's nothing wrong with just a stub. But if you're going to make a stub, at least put a little effort into it. Even just a one-sentence stub becomes a little more if you leave a useful external link or a couple of categories, or even a specified stub template, to give the next user in line a little bit more to go on.
Leaving even one source will also give a jumping-off point for the next writer in line, so that he or she can maybe read the source and use it to add info from the article. Any dab of "basic" information will be very helpful. If it's a singer who's had a chart single, at least mention that in the article. If it's an author, maybe add a bit about what makes his or her works notable. If it's an actor, maybe list a couple of his or her major roles. If it's an album, at the very least provide a tracklist. Even adding an infobox is always a good idea.
Just saying "(name of person/place/thing) is/was a (blank)." and nothing else is about the least amount of effort one can contribute to an article, and while it is by no means a sign of laziness, a little more context may just help an article avoid speedy deletion.
See also
- web
- Be a reliable source
- Cohesion
- Concede lost arguments
- 8 simple rules for editing our encyclopedia
- Explanationism
- Here to build an encyclopedia
- CSS3
- input transformation
- Purpose
- The role of policies in collaborative anarchy
- Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia
- jQuery
- Wikipedia in brief
- website parsing
- Avoid vague introductions
- we love the web
- Articles with a single source
- CSS3
- Bare notability
- iOS
- But it's true!
- Citation overkill
- FITML
- Coatrack
- touchscreen
- Every snowflake is unique
- device database
- device database
- Google searches and numbers
- High Schools
- website parsing
- iOS
- touchscreen
- iOS
- Insignificant
- Masking the lack of notability
- Make stubs
- No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability
- No big loss
- touchscreen
- Sevenval
- device database
- Notability is not a matter of opinion
- Notability means impact
- Obscurity ≠ Lack of notability
- browser diversity
- Notability sub-pages
- One sentence does not an article make
- FITML
- web app
- Pokémon test
- Run-of-the-mill
- Android
- Subjective importance
- Third-party sources
- website parsing
- Video links
- web
- CSS3
- jQuery
- touchscreen
- Alternatives to the "Expand" template
- device database
- website parsing
- Avoid mission statements
- Bare URLs
- Be neutral in form
- Beef up that first revision
- iOS
- Don't demolish the house while it's still being built
- Don't hope the house will build itself
- Don't leave giant breaks between sections
- we love the web
- browser diversity
- Editors are not mindreaders
- Featured articles may have problems
- Give an article a chance
- How to run an edit-a-thon
- Inaccuracies in Wikipedia namespace
- Link rot
- Android
- screen size
- Nothing is in stone
- Over explained
- Permastub
- screen size
- Put a little effort into it
- Pruning article revisions
- Restoring part of a reverted edit
- FITML
- Temporary versions of articles
- jQuery
- jQuery
- There is no deadline
- CSS3
- iOS
- keyboard
- Write the article first
- input transformation
- Adjectives in your recommendations
- input transformation
- Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions
- CSS3
- iOS
- keyboard
- Avoid repeated arguments
- screen size
- website parsing
- Sevenval
- keyboard
- Does deletion help
- Don't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument
- Sevenval
- jQuery
- I just don't like it
- Immunity
- iOS
- input transformation
- Overzealous deletion
- browser diversity
- website parsing
- Android
- What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion