Yay, just to make sure, a country is done even if the linked pages are stubs? e.g. Denmark would be considered complete as it is? --Stefan (sertmann)Talk 23:24, 6 December 2008 (EST)
Yes, at least in my opinion. Jpatokal 00:19, 7 December 2008 (EST)
Updating sites and organising by date
Right now, when we update a country, we add a tag based off the year the most recent WH site was added, per "Use last year the list was updated, not the current date." But there seems to be some confusion. Take Benin for example. Abomey, its only site, was inscribed in 1985, yet the hidden subtext says it was "Updated in 2011". So are we basing the dates off a country's newest site's year of inscription, the year a WT user last added a site to the list, or the year the list was last checked and confirmed?
Considering the list is only updated anually, I suggest we have just one tag/comment at the top that states the year the list was last checked and updated with new sites. So now, we should update the list with the 26 new sites that were inscribed this year and put "Up-to-date as of the 2012 inscription". JamesA>talk 04:51, 16 July 2012 (EDT)