Template talk:Marvel-Comics-stub

I've just removed the text saying 'please consider joining WikiProject:Comics'. This does not need to be in a stub which is seen by everyone who visits the article, some of whom may not even know what a WikiProject is. Maybe it's useful to someone who edits the page, but otherwise, no. Please do not re-add it without explaining your reasoning on Template talk:Marvel-Comics-stub. splintax ^(talk) 09:34, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I've added it back, a lot of other projects do it and I fail to see what harm it does. If people do not know what a WikiProject os they will learn by clicking the link, part of the principle upon which both wikipedia and the web are based, I believe. The reasoning is that people may be more inclined to join wikipedia if they feel there is a community within which they would feel comforatble. If they are reading articles about comics, and feel inclined to edit it, it lets them know such a community exists and is full of like-minded people who can give them any help they need.
Hiding talk 23:38, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

• Bravo, Splintax. Spam is rude. Spam is self-centered. Spam sucks. The article pages are for readers, and only seconarily for editors, and the stub-tag exception to that was controversial and based on the fact they serve as an apology for an inadequate article as much as they serve as a simple solicitation to edit; this is emphasized by the stub notice providing a lk to edit the stub in question (by which they can finish & return to reading the same article without even learning to look for the "edit this page" tab). People who are ready to join a project are already editing, and will find out abt projects by other, editor-specific, means. It doesn't appear that other projects do it, and if they do, name them so they can be stopped as well. (See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/templates.) Wiki-projects should not suck. Stop it.
  --Jerzy•t 20:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
  
  • I'm always a little unclear on the distinction between readers and editors in an encyclopedia anyone can edit. Please could you source your argument that consensus dictates these links are spam, I'd appreciate it. As to other Wikiprojects doing it, see {{Australia-gov-stub}}, {{cricket-stub}} for starters. There are probably others out there, but given I'm unclear as to the sourcing of your argument I'm not going looking for them. Hiding talk 20:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oh, and having just read your message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/templates, perhaps you could bear Wikipedia:Civility in mind when throwing around terms such as "self-centered and rude".
    Thank you. Hiding talk 20:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
• While the civility matter bears response, it is more urgent to steer others' responses back to where i implicitly solicited them, a secn on a pg whose scope is more appropriate.
  --Jerzy•t 21:44, 4 January 2006 (UTC)