Thread:Paperluigi ttyd/@comment-4969948-20161123042556/@comment-4969948-20161123045417

No, it doesn't have to do with series threads because that can naturally go inactive due to hiatuses.I believe we've had this rule for quite some time, but you do make a fair point that you obviously wouldn't have known about it.

As for the stub timer, we put that into place to narrow down the stubs so that they aren't as frequent and/or not dealt with in time. Plus, there were quite a large number of them so this made it easier. If some of the pages you see are marked as stubs, then that is either because they are dead articles and serve virtually no point in still existing, or they are badly/poorly made and can't really be expanded.

We use the stub timer for pages that have been made by inactive users and then we notify them in the off chance (such as yourself) they reply to it and/or come to the wiki and find that their page is stubbed.

All in all, I'll redact your warning because you made a very sensible case and you wouldn't have really known about it. I mean, the rule isn't THAT new, but it also wasn't ever really listed anywhere nor was it enforced as much as now.