In 100.3 when creating a symbol - if it’s a group, the checkbox will be visible, but if you do the same for a single layer or an artboard, the checkbox is missing and the symbol is created on the canvas.
In the 101 beta, the “Send symbol to symbols page” checkbox never appears.
Hey Ash,
Thanks for sharin this. I tested in both 100.3 and the latest beta and the behavior was consistent and working properly. Here’s the summary:
The behavior for creating symbols out of single layers, groups and artboards was correct in the tests I made in both final 100.3 and beta 101
Same thing happens if I create a symbol from a group
Can you try again and let us know if you still run into the issue? Many thanks!
One extra tidbit I’d like to add to this (Jorge’s post pretty much covers all the functionality of the Create new Symbol feature), is that you can use Automate Sketch to move Symbols from page to page, with ease.
Done!With this you should be able to move Symbols to any page, in case you want to keep a very organised and tidy Library. 
Ok. So I think I have tracked this down now.
If I open a fresh document and create a symbol I get the checkbox as I’d expect. It works for both objects and groups, artboards do not have the checkbox, as demonstrated.
But if I open a new document, convert an artboard to a symbol, then subsequently try and create a symbol from a layer or group, I will not get the checkbox, meaning from that point onwards I no longer have the option to create the symbols page.
Make sense?
First off, I’m not sure I understand arbitrarily enforcing symbols containing artboards do not get the option to be sent to another page. What’s the context there? But also yeah, if I do this first, I no longer get the option to create and send subsequent symbols to a symbols page.
I’m aware this can be done manually later on, but it feels pretty janky and broken.
Edit: So I’m assuming the “No artboards in the symbols page” rule is something to do with symbols being a variant of an artboard themselves on the symbols page? This kind of feels like the tail wagging the dog from a UX perspective, unless I’m missing some additional context for why it’s ended up this way. Maybe to do with constraints and nested artboards maybe?
The users desired action is “make something reusable” the semantic differences shouldn’t really matter to them if it has no real material effect.
Another edit:
The workflow I’d suggest would be to simply leave the checkbox there, all the time. I’ll demonstrate it with a bit of pseudo code:
If user creates symbol & checkbox checked = create symbol page and send symbol
else if user creates symbol & checkbox unchecked = Leave symbol in place
If user creates additional symbol and symbol page does not exist {
if user creates symbol & checkbox unchecked = leave symbol in place
else if user creates symbol and & checkbox checked = create symbol page, send symbol and ask user if they would like to relocate all previous symbols
}
Hi Ash,
Thanks for the reply. I’ll start with the end 
– thanks for sharing this suggestion:
I’ve added it as a Feature request.
Now, let’s go back to a couple of points I think are worth clarifying:
Following your example, after creating a Symbol from an artboard you can create a page named “Symbols” and that will bring the checkbox back, so any symbols created afterwards can be sent there:
All Symbols have an artboard in their source and you can move them to the Symbols page. The reason why it’s not done automatically is because when you create a symbol from a layer or group, the layer or group becomes an instance and the source needs to live somewhere else: the Symbols page or the page where you created it.
Artboards are also top level containers and transforming them into an instance directly can have undesired implications, like breaking flow in a series of screens or breaking prototyping links. This is why having artboards not sent automatically to the Symbols page is deliberate.
Hiya,
just saw this, sorry for the late reply. Thanks for putting it in as a feature request. Regarding this:
This is very much an “internal logic” solution. From a users perspective, the action is broadly the same thing, ultimately semantics. Whether you have a group, turn it into a symbol and move it to the symbols page, or create an artboard and do the same thing, you’re still left with an instance of an symbol containing an artboard where you created it. It just feels like a needless wrinkle and as much as it isn’t technically a big deal, I guess my motivation for pointing these kind of things out is that I see Sketch as Figma, but with polish. I’d love to see you guys double down on refinement requests like these. (Not this one specifically, but you know what I mean)
Sorry, did not address your second point:
If there are dependencies on an artboard, graceful degradation should be considered. If it’s a link in a simple artboard-to-artboard prototype, it should just swap out, if chid groups and objects within the artboard have additional prototype links then simply notifying the user “Do you really want to do this? It’ll break X,Y,Z” - totally imperfect, but I’d take a warning over an arbitrary dead end. It’s something I’d want to at least test with users (Both new and old) as a hypothetical. Again, I’m not losing too much sleep about this specific issue, it’s more the inconsistency and the fact it’s not something you can really document you know? Something a user just has to know.
