Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2011/June

< Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion‎ | Log

June 30

edit

Category:Asian Para Games stubs / {{Asian-para-games-stub}}

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename template. Note that category is still below threshold; if it remains so, it may be re-nominated for upmerging

Unproposed creation of this and its associated template. Well-formed, but the entire tree of Category:Asian Para Games has fewer than 30 articles, so there's no way this has 60 currently existing stubs. Upmerge into Category:Sports event stubs until there are sufficient stubs for this to reach the threshold. Grutness...wha? 01:19, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The topic Asian Para Games just got a dedicated task force (Asian Games task force), under which I'm trying to make new articles. I am busy at the moment with the some other stuff of task force, but from tomorrow would happily make articles for Para Games, and there would definitely have been more than 30/50 stub articles (criteria says 30 if there is a specific associated WikiProject). So I request three more days for my work. — Bill william comptonTalk 01:44, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you've got a task force, then you should be looking at an assessment template, not a stub template. Stub categores are not connected with individual subject projects or task-forces; they're run for editors across the entirety of Wikipedia. Read WP:Stub#Stub types, WikiProjects, and Assessment templates. And a task force is not a separate WikiProject, so the threshold would still be 60 (the specific WikiProject already has its specific template - multi-sport-stub). In any case, stub categories are only created when there are sufficient existing stubs to warrant them. Normal procedure would have been to make the stubs first and then proposed a template and category at WP:WSS, or - as I said - used an assessment template, which is far more flexible to an individual task-fore's needs. Grutness...wha? 05:11, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've also just realised that the template is at the wrong name. There is no such thing as the "Asian para games", they're the Asian Para Games - so the template should be at {{Asian-Para-Games-stub}} -simple renaming required (no objection to keeping the current name as a redirect). Grutness...wha? 00:43, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I admit it was a mistake, I should have made stubs first. But now this category is worthy to keep, as it includes 44 articles, and within two more days it certainly would have crossed mark of 60. And yes I support the renaming of template. — Bill william comptonTalk 03:50, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The usual principle with this page is that if a stub type can get to threshold before it becomes old business then - unless there are other major problems with it - there's a very good chance it'll be saved. In this case the major problem was the lack of files - if there's no lack of files, then - unless someone else points out other major problems - I don't see any problem with it. But it's got to get there! Grutness...wha? 01:09, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Montclair-politician-stub}}

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming -just for the moment - that we were sometime soon going to start splitting politicians by individual city. Where would be the first place to start. New York City, perhaps, or Paris, or London. I doubt whether Montclair, New Jersey would enter many people's minds. Given that we don't split politicians by individual city anyway, this becomes doubly odd. In any case, both articles that this was on were already correctly tagged with {{NewJersey-politician-stub}}. Delete Grutness...wha? 00:43, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 28

edit

Category:Pre-Columbian stubs → Category:Pre-Columbian era stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename

I know some of the stubs here have been around a long time, but... it isn't the stubs that are Pre-Columbian. The key article is at Pre-Columbian era. Linked to a similar rename proposal for the permcat, so we probably need to follow whatever the decision is there. Grutness...wha? 14:27, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The permcat has been renamed to Category:Pre-Columbian era. Grutness...wha? 00:33, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 27

edit

Category:Australian football (soccer) biography stubs / Category:Australian women's football (soccer) biography stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was discussion seems moot - category was renamed out of process to yet another name via WP:CFD

Rename to Category:Australian association football biography stubs and Category:Australian women's association football biography stubs, respectively, per the soon-to-renamed permcats (which will be speedily renamed, in 48 hours, per the convention of Category:Association football in Australia). -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC) (Update: The permcats are now being discussed here; there's no doubt that the "association football" wording will be adopted, but it will take seven days instead of just two. 03:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Support - seems pretty straightforward. Grutness...wha? 01:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming the perm cats are moved then support. Waacstats (talk) 11:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Australian football (soccer) club stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename to Category:Australian soccer club stubs to correspond to the moves of all other categories of Australian "football (soccer)" categories to just "soccer."--Mike Selinker (talk) 02:36, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to Category:Australian association football club stubs, per the permcat: Category:Australian association football clubs. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support - seems pretty straightforwartd. Grutness...wha? 01:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Again assuming the perm cats are moved then support. Waacstats (talk) 11:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Delete category Category:North Dakota sports venue stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Upmerge. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:53, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only 23 pages in permcat. Propose deleting category, upmerging template, with no prejudice against recreating category once sufficient articles are found. Dawynn (talk) 18:13, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge per nom. Grutness...wha? 01:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Delete category Category:Latvian television stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was upmerge

Only 10 pages in permcat. Propose deleting category, upmerging template, with no prejudice against recreating category once sufficient articles are found. Dawynn (talk) 17:48, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge per nom. Grutness...wha? 01:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Removal of Netherlands Antilles stub tags

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete geo-stub only

This geo-political entity dissolved in October 2010. Propose emptying and removal of the following templates:

  • {{NetherlandsAntilles-geo-stub}}
  • {{NetherlandsAntilles-athletics-bio-stub}}
  • {{NetherlandsAntilles-footy-bio-stub}}
  • {{NetherlandsAntilles-politician-stub}}

Dawynn (talk) 14:30, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support for the geo, tentative support for the others. Geos always go by current political entity... but note the debate at WSS/P relating to NethA. These are probably safe to get rid of, though. Grutness...wha? 01:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Removing proposal for bio stubs. Complications of playing for Netherlands Antilles national (regional?) teams, etc. However, because of the WSS/P proposal, these will be restored and moved under the general 'Caribbean' categories. Dawynn (talk) 11:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.


June 24

edit

Category:Children's television episode stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete, upmerge template

Propose deletion of category, upmerge of template. Most of the articles in the permcat and its subcategories are lists. And lists are not stubs. Struggling to come up with more than about a dozen articles here. Dawynn (talk) 10:38, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 23

edit

{{Bengali-Hindu-stub}} / Category:Bengali Hindu stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete

The following nomination has been relisted to generate more discussion. The previous discussion is in the box below. Subsequent comments should be made below the box. No further edits should be made to this section.


Seems an unnecessary split, and counter to the way Hinduism stubs is currently being split. Another deletion candidate unless any justification can be shown as to why this is a reasonable split, unlikely given that there's no equivalent permcat. At the very least, some tidying is definitely required, especially of the category. Grutness...wha? 23:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It may not be at all unnecessary. Hindu is not just about adhering to Hinduism. There is a social, cultural and ethnic element to it. The Bengali Hindu people have unique things about them - no less than 36 castes, innumerable sects and historic events, which are not shared by other Hindus. The same is true for other Hindu ethno-linguistic groups - the Punjabi Hindus, the Tamil Hindus and so on. In my view, they need similar sub-grouping. BengaliHindu (talk) 17:18, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It still seems an unusual split, given the usual way that religious, social and ethnic stubs in general are split. Consider the other sub-categories of Hinduism stubs relate directly to philosophy, mythology, theology, biography, and holy places. More importantly, as a topic area it does not have a permanent category, something which should always come before a stub split, and certainly there's no indication that there are enough stubs to meet the requirement for a separate stub category. Grutness...wha? 23:32, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is older, pre-relist discussion. Please make any further comments below.
Delete based on the fact that the normal way to split religion is not by ethnic groups. Waacstats (talk) 11:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Plural Wisconsin/Scottish representative cats

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename } Somehow, these slipped through in pluralised forms, where stub naming requires the singular:

I'll admit the new names sound a bit strange, but strip them of their trappings, and it's a simple "Members stubs or Member stubs" question, and Member would be correct, since it's the stubs that are plural, individual articles are not about more than one person. See also my comments on the similar NY nomination below (June 8th). Grutness...wha? 12:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was deleted/moved per nom Suggestion of using "retailing-stub" seems more appropriate, but former "retail-stub" still availabe for redirect if wished

This discussion dates back to Sep 2009. Based on the original discussion, I'm proposing two template name changes:

Dawynn (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both proposals sound sensible. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, it is a bit of a mess. As the Viking says, it sounds very sensible Grutness...wha? 01:34, 24 June 2011 (UTC),[reply]
...though come to think of it, I'd make the new stub {{retailing-stub}} to save people who know the old name from still using it for companies. Grutness...wha? 11:16, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 22

edit

Rename of {{Cartoon Network-stub}}

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename, delete current name; not upmerged, but may need to be revisited later

Propose rename to {{CartoonNetwork-stub}} -- or any other name that doesn't include a space. Dawynn (talk) 12:09, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom, and lose the current name. Would also suggest upmerging, given that it is only used on seven stubs. Grutness...wha? 13:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename and Upmerge per above. Waacstats (talk) 11:54, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not so sure about the upmerge, as the permcat has 147 articles tagged as stubs; however, definitely Rename the template. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm willing to start tagging more articles (and there are definitely several that could be tagged), but wanted a valid tag first. Dawynn (talk) 15:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Youtube-stub}}

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete. Speedied very slowly.

To the best of my knowledge, never used in over a year of existence. Given that the permcat parent only has some 180 articles, its necessity is questionable too. Delete. Note: if decision is to keep, it should be renamed to {{YouTube-stub}} per YouTube. Grutness...wha? 13:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unused and incoreectly named. Waacstats (talk) 11:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Is its intended scope the same as the deleted {{Youtube-videos-stub}}? If so, then this is a speedy G4 case. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well spotted! Difficult to say what the scope's supposed to be since it's unused, but could well count as a G4. Grutness...wha? 09:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 21

edit

Rename of Luxembourg categories

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was withdrawn

I see that someone updated the text for the {{Luxembourg-sculptor-stub}} template to read Luxembourgish instead of Luxembourgian. A review of the Luxembourg article indicates no use of Luxembourgian, but Luxembourgish is used both for the language, and for adjectives. Propose the following category name changes:

Dawynn (talk) 12:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Luxembourgish can refer both to the country and to the language; Luxembourgian can only refer to the country, which is what is intended here.[1] I don't see why we should move from precise language to ambiguous language. If anything, then we should move, for all such categories, to the scheme "Stubs of building and structures in Luxembourg", "Stubs of people in Luxembourg", etc. After all, the assumption that for every country there is a corresponding adjective is incorrect, and when there is one it sometimes has problems which the country name itself does not have (other examples being American for the US or Nigerian for both Niger and Nigeria). Hans Adler 13:08, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the history, Grutness. Dawynn (talk) 12:07, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.


June 18

edit

{{SI-stub}}

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:36, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unproposed, as is completely clear from its name. Don't look - have a guess. No, it's no a stub type for SI, the international measurement system. Neither is it for any of the other most likely items mentioned at Si (disambiguation): Signal integrity, Sensory integration, the South Island, Silicon, Si County, Slovenia, the SI register, Swarm Intelligence, or the Socialist International. It's for the Smithsonian Institute. Rename to {{Smithsonian-stub}} and delete this impressively ambiguous name. Grutness...wha? 02:20, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename way too ambiguous. Waacstats (talk) 23:54, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 17

edit

{{Museu_Picasso-stub}}

edit

Unproposed, spacey template, linked straight to a permcat. A permcat with ONE (count 'em!) article. Created, by the looks of it, not for a WikiProject overall, but for a taskforce of a WikiProject. Which has just one member. If ever there was a classic case of putting the cart before the horse, this is it. It's also a copybook example of a case where a talk page template would be more useful than a stub type. Delete, ASAP! Grutness...wha? 07:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as almost unused. Waacstats (talk) 23:55, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 15

edit

Category:Gaelic football people stubs → Category:Gaelic football biography stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename

Usual system is to use "biography" in these cases. See discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2011/June#Category:Gaelic_Athletic_Association_club_stubs_and_Category:Hurling_people_stubs. Grutness...wha? 01:42, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Gaelic games

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename - keep current names as redirects

This one's a little unorthodox, since GAA is a dab page, but I think it's probably widely-enough known that a GAA club is a Gaelic games club. All of the subtypes for clubs by region use Foo-GAA-club-stub, so it would make sense to change thsat one at least, and since the categories are "Gaelic Athletic Association" rather than "Gaelic games". Changing the other to follow suit also makes sense, given that it simply means reversing an existing redirect (keeping the current names as redirects). Grutness...wha? 02:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support As Grutness says this is a little strange. AN other reason for it being strange is that Gaelic Games pre-dates the Gaelic Athletic Association and things in theory could be Gaelic Games but not GAA which was the original reason for choosing Gaelic-games rather than GAA however in the 5 years this stub template has existed I've yet to see a case where this distinction is important Gnevin (talk) 13:30, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 14

edit

Rename of Category:Western Australian rail stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:20, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose rename to Category:Western Australia rail stubs. Western Australia is the name of an Australian state, not a region. So, this is not like saying West African. Rather, its more like saying North Dakotan. The rename will introduce parallelism with other Australian rail category, other Western Australia categories, and with the original proposal. Dawynn (talk) 00:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support, for the reasons given. Grutness...wha? 09:31, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support  As per nom for orthogonality of Category:Australia rail stubs.  Unscintillating (talk) 17:16, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{CentAm-hist-stub}} / Category:Central American history stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Rename and upmerge. Ruslik_Zero 18:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unproposed, and badly named template. If needed, then it should be at {{CentralAm-history-stub}}. But it's questionable whether it is needed or whether separate country templates might be better. At the very least a rename (with deletion of the current name) is necessary, and very likely also an upmerge of the category. Grutness...wha? 02:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and rename -- I just created this stub because I was working on a Central American history stub, and noticed that {{SouthAm-hist-stub}}, {{SEAsia-hist-stub}}, etc. exist already, and felt that there should be one for Central American history articles as well (Sorry for not proposing it -- I didn't realize I was supposed to, and will do so in the future). I'm open to renaming it however you like, but don't think that it should be deleted unless you are going to remove all of the other "region"-hist-stubs as well (which I wouldn't be opposed to -- I just want it to be consistent). Thanks. -- Jrtayloriv (talk) 03:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point, though the other ones you name are old ones - in the last couple of years WP:WSS has been slowly replacing all regional types where possible with nation-specific ones (both of these have been around since about 2005-06, which is why they also still have the deprecated -hist- style). After a bit of thought I'd agree that it makes some sense to have a single CentralAm stub, given the intertwined histories of the countries in the region - but also be aware we already have specific stubs for some specific periods of Central American history (e.g., the somewhat overlapping {{Pre-columbian-stub}} and {{Mesoamerica-stub}} - more about one of which below...). As for the category, upmerging is probably still the best measure for the time being, since the number of stubs that use (and currently could use) the stub is fairly low. Upmerging would in no way prejudice against re-creating the category (after proposal) once it reaches the standard threshold for a category split (60 stubbed articles). Grutness...wha? 06:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with upmerging, or whatever else you decide to do. I'm really not familiar with stub-sorting practice here, and just kind of created the stub off-hand, based on the South-Am version. Do whatever you think is best. Thanks. -- Jrtayloriv (talk) 17:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Pre-columbian-stub}}

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename, redirects kept

This template is currently at the above name, with a redirect at {{Pre-Columbian-stub}}. Understandably (since it's named after a person), the key article is at Pre-Columbian, not Pre-columbian, so the template and redirect should really be reversed. Standard stub naming suggests a further title, however - {{PreColumbian-stub}}, as this isn't a subtype of Columbian-stub. I'd like to propose that the template is moved to the latter name, with both the other names remaining as redirects. Grutness...wha? 06:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Adult-Swim-Williams-Street-stub}}/Category:Adult Swim and Williams Street stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete

Unproposed, and the chances of finding the required 60 stubs are minimal, to say the least. As to the template name, well there are times when words fail me - certainly not a subtype of some non-existent "Street-stub", as the hyphens suggest. No permcat either - the nearest would suggest that in the highly unlikely event of this being needed, {{WilliamsStreetStudios-stub}} and Category:Williams Street Studios stubs would be the correct names. Delete. Grutness...wha? 02:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 13

edit

Rename of Category:UAV stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename

Propose renaming Category:UAV stubs to Category:Unmanned aerial vehicle stubs. Neither the permcat nor the main article is abbreviated. Dawynn (talk) 11:43, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

support rename. Waacstats (talk) 13:21, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support rename. I'd never have guessed what it was from the abbreviation,a nd I doubt I'm alone in that. Grutness...wha? 02:19, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 11

edit

NZ politician

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Rename both. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As was pointed out on proposals the following need changing

Waacstats (talk) 07:46, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per my comments at WP:WSS/P, though if this is consistent, it's perhaps less vital. It just seems an odd standard compared to other countries see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2011/June#Category:New_Zealand_politician_stubs). Grutness...wha? 01:39, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 10

edit

Premature Iran categories

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was upmerge (or, given there are no templates, move articles to other stub categories)

Unapproved, no template, with little hope of reaching viable size. Please delete the following categories, tagging all articles with approved stub tags:

Dawynn (talk) 13:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As creator of these categories, I agree that they are still premature, but I have plan to complete these categories in a Month. I just made those for in first step to sorting Iranian writing articles that spread through the Wikipedia. Unfortunately most of Iranians I see in Wikipedia are sensitive in political articles but no one help me in literature parts. Now, what would I do after this nomination for deletion? Is it possible to stop deletion?P. Pajouhesh (talk) 16:08, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First, stop the way you are loading these stub categories. Please go to the proposal page and propose new templates for the areas you want to work on. Stub articles are not added directly to categories, but tagged with templates. With templates, you can freely tag articles without frustrating team members about the size of your categories. For now the templates could be upmerged to Category:Iranian people stubs. Once the templates have at least 60 articles, they can be moved into separate categories. Dawynn (talk) 18:43, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now, shouldn't really have cats flying around without templates. Waacstats (talk) 23:15, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Stub cats being used without templates is a no-no. No reason not to have proposals for the templates, though, although "critics" is very very ambiguous (theatre critics? critics of the political regime? what?) Grutness...wha? 01:31, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's also worth noting that two of the categories are misnamed (plurals), and a significant proportion of the articles in these categories aren't stubs... Grutness...wha? 01:46, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 8

edit

New York Assembly Member stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename with amendment as indicated

A couple of these new proposed creations seem to have slipped through with an extra comma. Propose renaming:

Sounds good to me rename Waacstats (talk) 23:18, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Should be singular, not plural. Change it to "Member of..." and you're onto a winner. Grutness...wha? 08:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

England football defender cats

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Rename both. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:12, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of these new proposed creations seem to have slipped through with an extra comma. Propose renaming:

Grutness...wha? 02:47, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops looks like atleast one of those is my fault. therefore delete. Waacstats (talk) 23:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

June 6

edit

Category:Horror stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was rename

Rename to Category:Horror fiction stubs, since the permcat has been renamed per Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 May 29#Category:Horror. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:38, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per above. Waacstats (talk) 10:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{TijuanaMetroAreaBCN-geo-stub}}/Category:Tijuana metropolitan area geography stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete

Unproposed new category and template. No explanation given for the unusual template naming (which BCN is being suggested? None of these seem to fit), no indication that this will reach the size threshold (in fact, the new category is a subcategory of another unproposed category (see below) which does not reach threshold!). And, what's more, there's no indication yet that any Mexican citiesrequire their own stub types, or that splitting in this way is the best way of splitting them out. Delete. Grutness...wha? 02:47, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as undersized, unproposed and incorrectly named. Waacstats (talk) 10:40, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Baja California geography stubs

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was upmerge, with no prejudice against later creation if it reaches the threshold level

Unproposed split from Mexico geography stubs, despite only having some 35 stubs. Reupmerge unless sufficient stubs can be found for it, as per debate when the template was created in 2008. BTW, both this and the above stub type were created by an editor who has already been warned twice against making stub types out of processin the last few weeks (s/he also created both {{Tijuana-stub}} and {{Las Vegas-stub}} below). Grutness...wha? 02:47, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/Comment - A lot of other Mexican states have categories exactly like this. I don't understand why it is any different. Please see Category:Mexico geography stubs. 08OceanBeachS.D. 04:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's different because it hasn't reached the 60-stub threshold, as explained above, which all the others have. Please see WP:STUB. All the others met that threshold and were proposed as viable splits - the smallest of the other categories has 65 stubs. This is also why so many other Mexican state geo-stub templates (e.g., {{Aguascalientes-geo-stub}}, {{QuintanaRoo-geo-stub}}), are still upmerged. Grutness...wha? 00:50, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Upmerge till sufficient stubs exists. Waacstats (talk) 10:45, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.



Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/2011/June&oldid=434734145"