Forum:SH:Stub definition + 1st mention vs. Flashback

Hey, I have two questions.

The first is regarding stubs. I was curious if stubs are defined by their paucity in content and shortness in length or technically, by "completeness." In most cases, there would not be a contradiction as one cannot really judge when an article is "complete." With some subjects, however, where it is known that they only appear in a single source, and in that source, it is of the briefest of mention and nothing but and therefore nothing more can be said of the subject, would it still be a stub? Here is the example that prompted the question for me: rumbat. I just created this article, and as far as I know it is only mentioned in this line, "'I'll catch a rumbat to cook,' Lanoree says." (page 32) Nothing more is mentioned of the subject and no more information can be derived, considering it is it's only appearance, so would it still be a stub granted that all that can be said has already been said? (I do not think it's appropriate to assume that it is a bat-like creature).

In writing this, I think I already have the answer: one can never be certain anyways that it is its only appearance or that the content cannot be expanded upon with some creativity (though in the case of rumbat, I really don't see how anymore than I've already said can be said). Moreover, there will always be new information that can arrive on the subject.

I thought I might as well ask anyways.

My other question is regarding whether "First mentioned" and "Appears in flashback" is mutually exclusive. If something is first mentioned in a flashback, it doesn't mean it appears in the flashback. Sol Pacificus (talk) 13:12, February 16, 2016 (UTC)