Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries/Log/2009/June

Newly discovered, June 2009

{{hockey-stub}}

This template currently redirects to {{icehockey-stub}}, but probably shouldn't. Several of the ice hockey stub articles are more correctly hockey articles. I propose rescuing this template from its over-specialisation. Metao (talk) 01:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

This redirecthas been listed at SFD - it shouldn't exist. It was created without proposal by someone who obviously didn't realise that ambiguously named templates and redirects are avoided on Wikipedia. It certainly shouldn't be a redirect to icehockey-stub, since for probably 80% of the planet "hockey" primarily means field hockey. Grutness...wha? 07:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

{{Japan-mil-hist-stub}}

New unproposed creation by User:Nihonjoe, who should know better than to make a stub without proposing it (and by not proposing it initially created it at an incorrect name, {{Japan-milhist-stub}} - which he insists on keeping despite it being non-standard - thereby making more work for himself). It would be nice if he'd let us know if he intends it to be used by stub-sorters. I've fixed the coding of the template to standard coding. There's a dedicated category, but enough articles to fill it. Grutness...wha? 04:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

It was created at the other title because of a typo. I apologize for not being perfect like you apparently are. The whole point of proposing is to make sure the stub template is needed, and as this one is very clearly needed (and only used on about 20% of the articles it will end up being used on), there was no reason to propose it. WP:BOLD, WP:IAR, and all. Process for process' sake is bad. As for the redirect, I want it kept in case people mistype. Redirects are cheap, and it's very common to have a couple different redirects for likely typos. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:27, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

{{Africa-academic-bio-stub}}

Created unproposed as {{African-academic-bio-stub}}, I've renamed it to convention-meeting format and added reasonable upmerged categoryies (the template had no category, but the creator of it attempted to add one by creating a dedicated category inb article space, now deleted). I'd say that the template looks like a keeper, in upmerged form at least, though by-country templates would have probably been better in the long run. Grutness...wha? 02:39, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

{{Taiwan-hist-stub}}, {{ROC-hist-stub}}, {{ROC-party-stub}}, {{ROC-politician-stub}}, {{ROC-university-stub}}, and Category:Taiwan road stubs

All unproposed. The stub category doesn't have 60 stubs in it. {{Taiwan-hist-stub}} has no stubs. {{ROC-hist-stub}}, {{ROC-party-stub}}, {{ROC-politician-stub}}, and {{ROC-university-stub}} all have a very few stubs in them. impactF= 23:51, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

• ...and as has been pointed out several times before, we deliberately don't use ROC in stub names. We already have perfectly acceptable {{Taiwan-politician-stub}}, {{Taiwan-university-stub}}, and {{Taiwan-party-stub}} templates, so these should be into redirects at the very least, and should probably go to WP:SFD for outright deletion. Grutness...wha? 01:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I also found {{ROC-bio-stub}}, {{ROC-geo-stub}}, and {{ROC-stub}}. Should they go to WP:SFD too? I am also wondering about {{Taiwan-hist-stub}}, should it be kept? or go to WP:SFD as well? Thanks. impactF= 02:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Just redirect them to the correct title as people will likely keep creating them otherwise. Just making them redirects will reduce additional work in the future if we have to keep deleting them. Again, redirects are cheap. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:28, 6 June 2009 (UTC)