Administrator instructions
This page only deals with the deletion and renaming of stub types, which consist of a template and a category, and are intended to be used for sorting stubs. Stub templates that are missing categories and stub categories without associated templates are also appropriate here. All other templates or categories nominated for deletion or renaming have to be put on Templates for discussion or Categories for discussion, respectively.
About this page
This page is for the proposal, discussion, and voting on deletion or renaming of stub categories, stub templates, and stub redirects. Centralizing the vote on these three closely related matters on one page reduces the need for repeating identical arguments on several different Wikipedia deletion pages (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion, Wikipedia:Templates for deletion, and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion) and also reduces the workload on those pages.
This page is still named "Stub types for deletion" for two reasons. Firstly, many of the stub types brought here arrive here after rudimentary discussion has already taken place at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries. Secondly, renaming automatically implies some form of deletion. The renaming of a stub category leads to the replacement and deletion of the older category, and the renaming of a stub template usually (but not always) leads to the deletion of the previous template name, as stub template redirects are rarely used (for the reasons for this, see the stub naming guidelines).
Putting a stub type on Stub types for deletion (SfD), and what happens afterwards
- Mark the affected pages:
- For deletion:
- Put {{sfd-t}} on stub templates
- Put {{sfd-c}} on stub categories
- Put {{sfd-r}} on stub redirects, and include the redirect target after it (see below for details)
- For renaming:
- Put {{sfr-t|New-name}} (parameter optional) on stub templates
- Put {{sfr-c|New name}} (parameter optional) on stub categories
- Put {{sfr-r|New name}} (parameter optional) on stub redirects (Redirects should be nominated for renaming only as part of a mass renaming that includes templates that share the name element to be renamed that the redirect uses.)
- List the stub type below in a new subsection at the top of the section which has the current date. If that section does not yet exist, create it.
- Mention all affected pages in the subheading, like this:
==== {{tl|banana stub}} / [[:Category:Banana stubs]] / {{tl|YellowCurvyFruit-stub}} (redirect) ====
- Also mention how many articles currently use the template, and if it is listed anywhere else.
- Of course, state your reason for nominating the stub type!
- It is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors to the stub that you are nominating the stub. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the stub.
- After a voting period of seven days, action will be taken if there is consensus on the fate of the stub type. Please do not act before this period is over.
- Archived discussions are logged here, and are marked with {{sfd top}} and {{sfd bottom}}, indicating whether category and template were renamed, deleted, or no action taken.
Putting {{sfd-r}} or {{sfr-r}} on redirects
Given that the {{sfd-r}} and {{sfd-r}} templates break redirection, it is necessary to change a stub redirect when adding the template, as follows:
#Redirect [[Template:Example-stub]] should be changed to:
{{sfd-r}}{{Example-stub}}
Possible reasons for the deletion of a stub type
- They are not used in any article, and their category is empty
- They overlap with other stub categories, or duplicate them outright
- Their scope is too limited - As a rule of thumb, there should be at least 50 appropriate stubs in existence
- Their scope is too ambiguous or vague - in these cases, renaming may be more appropriate than outright deletion
- The stub category or template is misnamed. In this case, make this clear when nominating and propose a new category or template name. Note that - in the case of a template but not a category - it may be more appropriate to make it into a redirect.
- They are malformed, misnamed, or deprecated redirects
What this page is not for
Typical voting options
- Keep (do not delete or modify)
- Delete (delete template and category)
- Merge with xx-stub (delete category, keep template (either as redirect to, or feeding into the same category as, xx-stub))
- Merge with xx-stub without redirect (delete category and template, put xx-stub on all articles that use it)
- Upmerge (merge to parent stub type, typically by keeping the template but redirecting it to the parent stub category for potential re-splitting later)
- Change scope (reword the template, typically giving it either a larger or more precise scope. Usually also means renaming the category)
When voting, please try to give a more substantial reason than simply "I like it/find it useful" or "I dislike it/don't find it useful".
Renaming options
- Rename/Support
- (for templates: move to new name, replace existing usages, delete redirect);
- (for categories: recreate category page under new name, repopulate, delete old category).
- Rename, keep redirect/Move (for templates only: move, but don't replace usages of existing template)
- Oppose (no move of template, and/or deletion and recreation of category)
- DO NOT rename any stub type that has been nominated here while discussion is still in progress. Any necessary renaming will be done when the discussion is closed.
- If you wish to argue for the deletion of a template or category nominated for renaming, please re-tag with {{sfd-t}}/{{sfd-c}}, and note the date of doing so, so as to ensure proper consideration of this new nomination.
If a template is speedily renamed, similarly re-tag the resultant redirect if deletion of that is desired.
Note to non-administrators
If a category and/or stub deletion is agreed upon and you're helping to change the stubs on those pages: Once you've emptied the category, please note the category on this page under the "To Delete" section that the stub category section is empty ("orphaned") and "ready to be deleted" to the administrators.
Listings
August 20
This redlinked, unproposed template is not what it says on the can, and also runs counter-hierarchy. Voice actor stubs are split by nationality of the actors concerned, not by which language they use. Also, the template makes it clear this is for manga voice actors, despite what the template name says. Delete. Grutness...wha? 02:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Unproposed, curiously linked (the template feeds both the stub category and its two stub parents; the category links to no stub parents itself, and has a redlinked permcat parent), but most importantly, completely unnecessary. Cat:Comedian stubs has fewer than 200 articles, and though Cat:Norwegian people stubs is larger, simply removing comedians from it is not likely to reduce it much - in fact, with only 34 artiocles in total in Cat:Norwegian comedians, this won't reach threshold. Upmerge as a minimum, though deletion is possibly a better idea. NB - if the template is kept it will need to be rewritten - this is another of those f*****g asbox types. Grutness...wha? 02:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
August 17
Unproposed template and category for the European Space Agency - I point this out since the stub category suggests that it would be a subtype of Cat:ESA, which doesn't exist), so at the very least the stub category would need renaming. Given that the parent category and all its subcategories has just a shade over 100 articles. Stubs on this sort of subject are usually better divided up according to what they are about, rather than which agency they are part of - the one case where they have been divided up in this way (NASA stubs) shows the problem -v this has been around for nearly two years and only has 28 stubs. I'd like to propose upmerging whatever articles in these two categories (well in the NASA one; the other one is empty) can be upmerged into Cat:Spacecraft stubs and whatever other relevant categories exist, and creating a more widely-scoped Cat:Space program stubs to deal with all the remaining articles that cannot be upmerged in that way relating to NASA, ESA, Shenzhou, Soviet, Russian, Indian, etc etc programs. Grutness...wha? 01:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm new to this whole category area of wikipedia, but that seems like a good idea.U5K0 (talk) 10:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well there is a {{NASA-stub}}, so for balance, Oppose. Hektor (talk) 13:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- What's balance got to do with it? Please read WP:STUB. Grutness...wha? 00:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep all for now. Wide enough area, not being proposed is hardly a reason to delete, unless you want to cover Wikipedia in red tape, does it really matter what it is called? --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 23:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't nominate it for deletion because it was unproposed - though if it had been proposed then it wouldn't have had those problems which now make it a deletion candidate, since it wouldn't have been accepted for creation in its current form. Have you checked WP:STUB, WP:WSS/NG, and the other similar pages which explain why iit matters very much what these things are called? In particular, have you checked the area of WP:STUB which explains why there are specific size criteria for stub categories and what those criteria are? Grutness...wha? 00:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Old business
Everything from here on down is old business; the current 7-day review period has ended. Everything from this point on should be dealt with and removed from the workflow. Move this marker up as time passes.
August 9
Unporoposed, and used on one article. There are a few stubs for members of the Hawaiian royal family (for whon the parent category is Cat:Royal Family of Hawaii, not, as the stub category suggests, Cat:Hawaiian royalty), but these are currently happily coped for by the hardly-oversized Cat:Hawaii stubs. A case could be made for a separate stub type to cover all things relating to native Hawai'i (though what to call it might be problematic), but there's certainly no need at present for the nominated stub type. Delete, or at the very least upmerge to Cat:Hawaii stubs. Grutness...wha? 02:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep because articles in the category bumped up 25-50 articles. --frogger3140 (talk) 23:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Huh? Since when did still being a non-standard stub type with a below-threshold number of articles indicate a "speedy keep"? This is still more deletable than keepable. Grutness...wha? 00:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be enough articles to warrant this stub type. All the other royal stubs are at <place>-royal-stub, such as {{UK-royal-stub}} or {{Asia-royal-stub}}, so I don't see the problem with {{Hawaii-royal-stub}}. If there is a problem with it matching up with the permcat, then maybe the permcat needs to be renamed. ~ Amalas rawr =^_^= 18:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
June 23
Unproposed category for Middle Eastern football biography stubs, and a subtype of Cat:Middle Eastern people stubs. Why, then use the non-standard "West Asian"? Rename to Cat:Middle Eastern football biography stubs. Grutness...wha? 23:23, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, Western Asia is the name in current UN standard geoscheme. (Or were you complaining about the use of West instead of Western?) Still, I grant that Wikipedia generally prefers Middle East over Southwest Asia and doesn't use Western Asia save as a redirect to Southwest Asia. Unless someone wishes to propose replacing MEast-foo-stub with SWAsia-foo-stub, keeping things as Middle East for now makes sense. Caerwine Caer’s whines 01:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
AFC sort them as Western Asia, but i agree that Middle East is better. Matthew_hk tc 03:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
- Would it be an idea to atleast note on the Category that it is for countries in the West Asian Football Federation area to avoid ambiguity over which countries constitute Middle East (We have split other areas up by Federations leading to Israelis in the Euro cat and Aussues in the Asian), just to make things clear. Waacstats (talk) 12:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds fair. This is largely a "ducks in a line" exercise, and any reduction in confusion with adding explanatory notes is probably a good move. (FWIW - and not overly connected to this particular problem - I think that FIFA would be far better off splitting the Asian Confederation into West and East and merging East Asia and Oceania into an EAP region. It would make World Cup qualification less messy all round - especially for us in the Pacific!) PS: Sorry if I sounded grumpy on your talk page Matthew - it had been a bad day :) Grutness...wha? 13:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Actually, this should be list as CFD, this is for stubs, es we chould moving cats sounds like a good plan.--Freewayguy Msg USC 03:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- This is a stub category, and as such is dealt with here at SFD. As I said on one of your comments the other day, you really need to read up about this page and stubs in general before you make too many comments on the individual nominations. Grutness...wha? 01:47, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
To orphan
Stub types in this section have been deemed deletable and have to be removed from all articles using them, so that they can be deleted.
To delete
Stub types in this section have been orphaned and can be deleted.
Listings to log
Stub types with completed discussions which have not yet been logged; remove from this page entirely when logged. Anyone can do this, not just an admin; please see the directions at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log.
|
