|
Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/Deleted/October 2005
|
October 1st
An unused redirect of {{electro-stub}} (created from a page move in April). However, it could just as easily refer to elections, or undoubtedly other things. Delete. --Mairi 04:45, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
- Sounds fair. Elec is ambiguous. Grutness...wha? 04:57, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
- delete BL Lacertae 00:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete - is ambiguous. Lankiveil 07:41, 2 October 2005 (UTC).
October 2nd
Australian city stubs, part 1
As per discussion at WP:WSS/P, the various Australian city-specific stubs should be renamed for consistency.
Adelaide
In the case of Adelaide, this also means deleting the separate transport stub and merging it and adelstub into a new Adelaide-stub (each has only about 30 stubs). Grutness...wha? 00:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Do railway stations presently marked as {{Adelaide transport stub}} become {{Adelaide-stub}} or {{Adelaide-geo-stub}}? --Scott Davis Talk 10:41, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- Heh. It should be double stubbed as {{Adelaide-stub}} and {{Australia-rail-stub}}. Buildings and structures don't really count as geo-stubs, and there isn't yet a separate australia-struct-stub. Grutness...wha? 00:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support, and gree with Grutness that a railway station isn't a geo-stub, but willing to revisit the issue in several million years. (SEWilco 02:45, 3 October 2005 (UTC))
- Support. Maybe an {{Australia-struct-stub}} would be a good idea too. Mindmatrix 01:00, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Done - as to australia-struct-stub, I did propose it a couple of weeks back and it was rejected, but I suspect there are now more than enough stubs for it to pass. Grutness...wha? 06:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Hobart
In the case of Hobart, this proposal supersedes the proposed deletion of this stub type further down the page. This one also needs a category. Grutness...wha? 00:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Done. Grutness...wha? 06:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Canberra
In this case, ACT-geo-stub would also be a viable option, since over 95% of the A.C.T.'s geo-stubs relate to Canberra. Either that or Canberra-geo-stub can be used for the name, with the template message making it clear that it can be used for the entire capital territory. (I'd favour the latter option). Grutness...wha? 00:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support all of the above. In the third case, I'd certainly prefer ACT scopes, and I think I'd somewhat prefer the ACT names, too. Alai 02:53, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support as either {{Canberra-geo-stub}} or {{AustralianCapitalTerritory-geo-stub}} --Scott Davis Talk 10:41, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support I think we should probably go with Australian Capital Terrioty scope for all of them. Also {{ACT-geo-stub}} would be quicker and easier than {{AustralianCapitalTerritory-geo-stub}}. Martyman 03:31, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- The one problem with ACT-geo-stub is that we specifically try to avoid abbreviations since they may be ambiguous (hence WesternAustralia-geo-stub and Washington-geo-stub rather than WA-geo-stub, for instance) Grutness...wha? 07:08, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well I guess it should be spelt out in full then. Linking to Canberra suburbs with for example Yarralumla, Australian Capital Territory|Yarralumla has just made me a bit fed up with how long it is recently. Martyman 01:13, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support use of {{Canberra-struct-stub}}, or optionally the rather lengthy {{AustralianCapitalTerritory-geo-stub}}. I do not support the use of ambiguous acronyms or abbreviations, such as {{ACT-geo-stub}}. Mindmatrix 01:00, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- I favour using Canberra instead of Australian Capital Territory. Anybody who has had to type those three words over and over again while constructing suburb tables will agree with me. (although I usually do favour using Australian Capital Territory in favour of Canberra, in this case I think simplicity wins out!
- That said, I oppose deleting cat:canberra_suburb_stubs. I think it should be kept as a subcategory of either cat:canberra_related_stubs or cat:canberra_geo_stubs (or both). There are a LOT of canberra suburb stubs, and I think a lot of other stubs will get lots in all the noise if they are all put into the same category (such as the lakes and ponds, mountains and hills and significant parks). Adz 12:55, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Done, with very slight variation:
Grutness...wha? 06:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
More standard capitalization. And easier to do while it's still relatively new. --Mairi 21:19, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- CFD would regard this as a speedy rename. Though we don't have set rules for speedying here, I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be counted in the same way. Grutness...wha? 00:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Apparently for people who recieve the title Hero of the Russian Federation. Which cuts across standard categories, seems not particularly useful, and has very few suitable articles. Delete. --Mairi 04:52, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- How does it cut across standard categories? Zach (Sound Off) 04:57, 2 October 2005 (UTC) (creator of the stub template)
- The standard is to divide by occupation (such as writier, politician and military being common) after dividing by country, and this isn't specific to any occupation. --Mairi 05:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- That I can agree on. While most of the awardings went to Chechnya veterans or cosmonauts, atheletes and some writters recieved the title. The main reason why I created the template is that not only this is only showing that it is not only a subject that relates to Russia, but it (mainly) establishes notability, which is very picky on here. If there was a central website, like with the Order of Canada, that lists everyone who got the hero title, I would have used that instead. Zach (Sound Off) 05:18, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- There is the woefully incomplete List of heroes of the Russian Federation. Establishing notability would also be accomplished by mentioning the title in the article. It's possible there'd be enough articles for a stub relating to Russian military, or the space program (I don't follow bio stubs closely enough to know). --Mairi 05:28, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- I am checking that now, and I also happened to create that list. Once it gets to a good size, it will be transwikied (hopefully). Zach (Sound Off) 05:35, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- But since this is a keep/delete situation, I personally will side (and this should not be a big shock), but keep. I will happy to see this go after a while, but I am going to create these type stubs in the next few years, so they should meet Grutness's 50 article rule. Zach (Sound Off) 06:46, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Delete It only has 10 stubs now and it doesn't fit into our existing schemes. However, if there were a WikiProject associated with the Heroes of the Russian Federation, I could see keeping it. There are other ways of keeping track of articles about the Heroes of the Russian Federation that need work, such as Category:Hero of the Russian Federation or List of heroes of the Russian Federation if it is a purely personal endeavour. Caerwine 01:20, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- I am meerly just getting them up to stub status, then could work on them in the future, but I do not see how this does not work out to a "current scheme." But, I have let the folks know at the Portal:Russia about the creation of this template and that I am using it now. Zach (Sound Off) 01:29, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
October 3rd
A "dynamic" stub template. Which'd cause so many problems if it were used (fortunately it isn't). Strong delete. --Mairi 02:18, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete post-haste. Agreed - this is far more likely to do harm than good. Grutness...wha? 04:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: How is this different from {{metastub}} which is mentioned on WP:STUB? Should that be deleted as well? I actually prefer the wording in this template than the metastub one. --TheParanoidOne 09:35, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- Based on the name and the initial edit summary ("Dynamic stub. I am not searching for existing ones."), I interpreted it as for being used on articles, in place of a specific stub. This edit shows it being used as such (altho that's as much a problem with the individual user). I agree that the metastub wording could be better, tho. --Mairi 20:12, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete!!! BlankVerse ∅ 11:15, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
October 4th
In both cases, these have largely been emptied into subcategories, so it's a good time to rename both to wiki-standard, i.e., as Cat:United Kingdom geography stubs and Cat:United States geography stubs. Grutness...wha? 10:01, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
One of these needs to go. Both of them make reference tu {{EU-stub}} but the template feeds into the second. The first is empty but it is my understanding that the outcome of the "x-related" debates was that the "x-related" categories were to be scrapped. --TheParanoidOne 15:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- It is, although that decision was primarily for specific countries. I'd definitely be in favour of removing it from all stub categories, though, to bring the stub cat names more in line with the general cat names - so I'd favour the former name listed above. Grutness...wha? 00:16, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well since I created the {{EU-stub}} so I may as well weigh in. It was initially created as European Union stubs however I hadn't been around long at the time I didn't follow proper procedures, like proposing it first &c. Now I wonder if it would not be better named Category:European Union operations stubs as it was created to be for articles relating specifically to operations of the European Union as a political entity as opposed just anything relating to the countries of the EU. I've tried to explain it at the top of the cat and in the template, I keep an eye on it and to be fair it's not that often that other articles end up in it but this might be an opportunity to change it if anyone thinks it appropriate? If not than I go for the former as -related makes it even less clear what it's specifically for. -- Lochaber 15:40, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
October 5th
I think the proposed name meets the naming guidelines better. Aecis 22:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- This is handled on WP:SFD, has it been proposed there? ∞Who?¿? 22:44, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Aecis is right - the general format for naming is Cat:Foo stubs. Rename. Grutness...wha? 23:22, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Might as well Rename for consistency. The Land 16:27, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
I have corrected the typo in {{phil-lit-stub}} that led to the creation of this category and created the proper category at Category:Philippine literature stubs, but three articles continue to show up in this category. Why? NatusRoma 07:41, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- They showed up because of a caching problem regarding categories on templates. Any edits (including null edits) on the affected articles fix the problem. It's now empty, so speedy delete once it's been empty for 24 hours. --Mairi 03:37, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Because of the same problem none of the articles with the template currently feed into the correct category and will need null edits. However, none of them qualify as Philippines literature stubs (they're all Philippines writer stubs), so it should not be on any of them anyway. Also the name of the template is completely wrong (as - by WSS naming - it would refer to literature about philosophy). The stub type is currently under discussion at WP:WSS/D, and it is likely that it will be proposed for deletion soon. Grutness...wha? 06:33, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Pentalog is apparently a French IT company. With no signs of having more than 2 related articles on Wikipedia (the template is on both). Delete. --Mairi 01:50, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete superfluous in the extreme. Grutness...wha? 06:01, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, I just ran across this while checking for new pages. RasputinAXP talk * contribs 13:54, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, only one article left since the other just got speedied as a nn-bio. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 21:34, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
For Portuguese football clubs. This wasn't one of the ones mentioned in the recent footyclub split; and for good reason: Category:Portuguese football clubs includes 29 articles, and List of football clubs in Portugal has a handful of additional relevant articles. Currently feeds into Cat:European football club stubs, and used on 6 articles. Delete. --Mairi 01:58, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, since what was needed here was debated and this was definitely not considered worthwhile. In any case the name is bad. Grutness...wha? 06:01, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm busy counting the European football club stubs per country, and Portugal is not high on that list. Sweden and Scotland top the list. The others are nowhere near the threshold yet (from what I can tell now). Aecis 07:54, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
October 6th
Newly created, refers to Tamil Nadu, India. Probably much needed, but also definitely needs a new name, as TN is also the postal abbreviation for Tennessee, and an ISO code for Tunisia. Rename to {{TamilNadu-geo-stub}}. --Mairi 02:10, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- O.K.--SivaKumar 04:51, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Rename - India-geo does need splitting, but TN is not the way to name the new template. Grutness...wha? 06:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
SivaKumar went ahead and created {{TamilNadu-geo-stub}}; I redirected TN-geo-stub to there. The redirect should be still deleted. Mairi 00:38, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Created 2 days ago, unused. There is a new wikiproject, but it has one contributor. Furthermore, there's most likely less than 10 articles related to the author, not all of which are stubs. Delete. --Mairi 02:38, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Time to prune the stub list a bit, methinks. This category has had less than 10 entries for several months now, as per this diff. I propose this be deleted, and the stubs merged into its parent, {{oceania-stub}}. --TheParanoidOne 21:37, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Although I can see the worth of having individual stubs for every county, some of them - like these - will never get close to a viable population of stubs. And since Oceania-stub is hardly overburdened, I agree with delete. These can always be revived later if the need ever arises, anyway. Grutness...wha? 23:16, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Another one for pruning. This category has also had less than 10 entries for several months now, as per this diff. I propose this be deleted, and the stubs merged into its parent, {{oceania-stub}}. --TheParanoidOne 21:37, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, for the same reasons as I gave on palau-stub, above. Grutness...wha? 23:16, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
This category contains more biographies than just player biographies. As the category itself says, "while the category was originally envisioned only for players, non-playing personnel (managers, coaches, chairmen, executives) can also be included in this category, as long as they are directly connected to the sport." I think a rename is needed to better fit the articles in this category.. Aecis 11:48, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Renaming for stub categories must be directed to Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:05, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Moved from WP:CFD missed it earlier. ∞Who?¿? 04:40, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Rename - good point. There will be managers, coaches, etc in here too. Grutness...wha? 06:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: Perhaps it would be better to keep this category, plus create additional related and daughter stubs+categories. If you look at the category, the first page doesn't even get all the way through the letter A. Someone more familiar with fútbol will have to suggest the best way to divide up the articles. BlankVerse ∅ 11:36, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well, that would be an obvious one, I'd say - by nationality, in much the same way as the clubs are in the process of being divided. A large proportion of the managers and coaches are former players, but there are still some that aren't, and I'd be happier if they were kept in with the main category since the same editors are likely to know about them. I'd go ahead with the proposed move, but consider tallying up what nationalities can be split off. There are some that would just about be guaranteed (England, Italy, France, Germany, Brazil, and Argentina, to name just six). Grutness...wha? 11:51, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- I've gone through about 15% of the stubs (not particularly randomly), and found: English 59; Scottish 21; Norwegian, Australian 12; Northern Irish 10; Belgian, German, Turkish, Guinean, Brazilian 9; Argentinian 8 (out of 333 checked, of 2206 total). I'd say English and Scottish are fair enough, but the rest are only just big enough to warrant their own stub types. It might be best to split most by continent instead of country: I counted Europe 214 (including Eng/Scot), Africa 54, South America 24, and about 15 for each of the others. This way, the estimated totals for each category would be about: England 400, Scotland 140, Rest of Europe 900 (with possible further splits once we see exactly how many there are of each), Africa 350, South America 170, North America/Asia/Oceania 100 each. (Phew!) sjorford #£@%&$?! 13:58, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, those sound fair splits to me (by continent, plus the England and Scotland ones) - take this over to WP:WSS/P and run it past everyone there! Grutness...<font color=green>wha? 22:35, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- On its way... BTW, I agree with the renaming as well, just to be clear. sjorford #£@%&$?! 09:27, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
This category should be renamed, according to the guidelines set by WP:WSS/P. Aecis 18:37, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- definite rename. Grutness...wha? 23:16, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Indeed it should :) --Joy [shallot] 11:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support rename. --Monkbel 06:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
October 7th
A long-deprecated redirect to {{Canada-geo-stub}}. Only two redirects use the "place" coding - this and Ireland-place-stub, which should also be deleted but is still fairly heavily populated. This one was taken to WP:TFD way back in January 2005 and moved to canada-geo-stub - back then it was in use, but it hasn't been since at least June, so has the time now come for its deletion? Grutness...wha? 11:11, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep --Image:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 15:49, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete for the sake of consistency. No one should use the template going forward; get rid of it before somebody does. — Fingers-of-Pyrex 16:00, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Its not used and why should Canada have differant stub names to everywhere else? BL Lacertae 00:38, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. This has been superceded by {{canada-geo-stub}} and its descendants, and should not be used. Mindmatrix 00:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Unused redirect to Faroe-stub (for the Faroe Islands). The category has only a couple of dozen stubs, and it definitely doesn't need an ambiguous template redirect. Grutness...wha? 10:51, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. --Mairi 19:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Only for extra-solar planets, according to the template text. However, Category:Extrasolar planets has 79 articles, and by far most of those are about stars, which then either have a section or mention of an extrasolar planet. Not likely to have sufficient use. Delete. --Mairi 04:33, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, not enough use to warrant a stub template. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 07:13, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- ISTR standard procedure at the astronomical objects wikiproject is to list extrasolar panets as sections on the articles about the stars they circle, since very little is known about any of them yet. No doubt in time astronomers will find out more and separate articles will be made, but at the moment this stub type isn't needed. Grutness...wha? 07:20, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Agree with Grutness. DeleteA2Kafir 22:12, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
For "exploding animal-related articles". Delete. --Mairi 02:53, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Why, exactly, should it be deleted? Matt Yeager 04:10, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Very limited scope; doesn't have near 50 existing appropriate articles. Mairi 04:20, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Wow, an actual answer. Thank you. But if you don't mind my asking, why is that a problem anyways? Wikipedia is not paper, after all. Plus, there really isn't a good category to put the articles in--they were previously placed in Template:Biology-stub or Template:Weapon-stub, neither of which is anywhere near as accurate a moniker as the exploding animals one. Matt Yeager 05:10, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Stub categories are not like ordinary categories - they have a completely different purpose. Whereas ordinary categories are for readers looking for other articles on the same subject, stub categories are specifically for editors who know about a particular subjects and can expand articles. For editors, having to sort through a stub category with thousands of articles is a hassle, since they may well overlook some they can actually deal with. Similarly, there's no point in having a stub category with only one or two articles, since it would soon be emptied by diligent editors. For that reason - ideally - a stub category should have between abouit 60 and 600 articles: enough for editors to really get their teeth into, but no so many as to be daunting or a hassle. Any stub types that are too general (and therefore have lots of articles) get split into more specific topics that will have fewer stubs. Any which are too specific, though, are likely to be deleted. It's all a balancing act, and - along with physically changing stub templates on articles - is the main job of the stub sorting WikiProject. (Oh, and that's a delete by the way). Grutness...wha? 07:20, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Alright, conceded. (I still think it was hilarious.) Matt Yeager 23:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. A2Kafir 22:10, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Explode! ... and then delete. --TheParanoidOne 22:20, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- BJAODN the vandalized version. Aecis 10:19, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
BJAODN Delete. BlankVerse 11:27, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- BJAODN the vandalized version that I saw, and that Matt Yeager notes below: [1]. Personally, I don't think the unvandalized version is BJAODN material. BlankVerse
- BJAODN. Matt Yeager 06:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC) (yeah, I guess it was a bad joke)
- Yeah, fair enough - BJAODN - Grutness...wha? 11:36, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
(NOTE: this stub has actually been vandalized. Take a look if you don't believe it!) Matt Yeager 06:56, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
October 8th
New guideline for country-related stub categories does away with *-related. Aecis 10:18, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support this and all similar -related removals. Grutness...wha? 22:31, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- I concur. --Alynna 00:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support the above rename. --TheParanoidOne 21:52, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
October 10th
Pretty sure this one wasn't debated - if it had been, it would have been at {{WestVirginia-road-stub}}, the name to which I've redirected it. Since it's now at the new name, this incorrectly named one can be deleted. Grutness...wha? 07:08, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- It actually was proposed, with some debate too, including mention that 2-letter postal abbrevations are undesirable. Delete. --Mairi 21:05, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- I agree... I'd prefer that it was at {{West-Virginia-State-Highway-Stub}}, but to prevent further strife I accepted the old name. But it was proposed... I don't always create the road stubs immediately after they are approved (I like to do them in batches), and I didn't create this one. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Sorry - I hadn't noticed the original proposal (that page is just so damn big I'm bound to miss a few) - but the name's not a good one anyway, so... XX-State-Highway-Stub would limit it to state highways, whereas XX-road-stub allows for urban raods and streets as well, so it's a bit more all inclusive. In any case, I still think that all the XX-State-Highway-Stub names need renaming (that would be such a long job, though, that I'm not ready to propose it any time soon). Grutness...wha? 03:59, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete per above --Alynna 00:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, as per the discussion in that self-same moving-target proposal. Alai 05:54, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
This move would do three things: 1) Bring it in line with its non-stub parent Cat:Political parties; 2) remove that word "related"; 3) stop people potentially adding stubs about social get-togethers. Rename? Grutness...wha? 07:34, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- I could agree, but it will take a lot of work to do, since one has to visit all these stubs to rename the stub-category. Is there another solution. - Electionworld 08:38, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well, there are two solutions - firstly a bot, since it's obvious which stubs need to be changed, and they would all simply need a null edit (in which case there would be virtually no work); secondly, I've put in a proposal at WP:WSS/P to split some subcategories off this, which would reduce the number of stubs in the category (in which case the articles would need re-stubbing anyway). Grutness...wha? 09:30, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- Rename for clarity and consistency --Alynna 00:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- Rename. --Joy [shallot] 11:33, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- Rename. The new suggestion is much better. --Valentinian 01:25, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
The parentage and text of the category indicates that it's for feminism, while the template text, since June, says "female-related" (the template as had both wordings in the past). Almost all the marked articles are about feminism. Female-related poses several problems, including cutting across multiple existing categories (medicine, psychology, politics, etc). Rename (either way, the template/category need to be clarified). --Mairi 23:32, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- rename - yes, the name is misleading and possibly more than a little demeaning as well. Grutness...wha? 00:23, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Definitely rename. --Alynna 00:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
rename to Cat:Grrl stubs rename BL kiss the lizard 08:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
October 11th
{{Pennsylvania-stub}} was discovered on 1 October 2005. It's unused, and it has no category. No wikiproject exists for Pennsylvania. Delete. — Fingers-of-Pyrex 15:51, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete --Alynna 00:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
Australian city stubs, part 2
I left the two big cities until after the others were done, because they probably need a bot (I did the changeover of the others manually). These changes are as per recent discussions at WP:WSS/P#Australian cities
Melbourne
This has over 500 articles, so it will need a bot. Mind you, many of them should bein this second category, which currently has only 11 articles:
This would bring Melbourne into line with everywhere else on the planet as far as stub naming is concerned, and would be in line with recent changes to the Adelaide, Canberra, and Hobart stubs. Grutness...wha? 07:42, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
rename as suggested. Consistency is good. Agnte 16:40, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
Rename. Keeps most of Wiki's presentation up to scratch. --Tetsuya-san 00:17, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Sydney
As above, this would bring Sydney into line with everywhere else on the planet as far as stub naming is concerned, and would be in line with recent changes to the Adelaide, Canberra, and Hobart stubs. This would also probably need a bot, since there are about 350 stubs. Grutness...wha? 07:42, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- If my maths is correct then it will be in the region of 680 "Sydney suburb stub" articles now, since there was a push by myself and others to flesh out the missing suburbs. If a bot can do the changeover then I think it's a good idea, but if they have to be done by hand then I think it's a bad idea that's not worth it. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 07:47, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- A shame that push wasn't left until after the changeover, but still (it was announced at the Sydney WikiProject that a change was likely very soon) - currently about 2000 japan-geo-stubs are being changed over by hand, so it would just be a bigger job without a bot, not impossible. Grutness...wha? 00:25, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
rename for both Melbourne and Sydney for consistency with the other Australian cities. If there are too many Sydney suburb stubs (now a complete set thanks to Nick and others) to rename, I suppose that could be kept as a subcat of the new {{Sydney-geo-stub}}, and dissolved once most suburb articles have grown beyond stub status. No {{Sydney-stub}}/Cat:Sydney stubs? --Scott Davis Talk 11:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
- None currently exists - and there aren't currently any separate stubs for Perth o Brisbane, which is a bit of a surprise. Hopefully if they're needed the WikiProjects will contact us first, now that they know we exist :) Grutness...wha? 01:30, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- There actually is a (rather-unused) {{Perth-stub}} that's been sitting around on WP:WSS/D for a month and a half... --Mairi 01:41, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
rename both as suggested for consistency. --Alynna 00:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- rename (redirect or use a bot). - Ta bu shi da yu 23:31, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
- Rename, as all said above, for consistency. --Neigel von Teighen 22:33, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Update
Melbourne is done - hopefully someone with access to a bot will be able to change the Sydney ones over. Grutness...wha? 11:25, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
(Was tagged with {{cfr}} by User:Jayc, but not listed on WP:CFD)
There's been some discussion on the talk page. "Program" is the common spelling in the US, and Manual of Style recommends using the relevant national variety of English for country-specific pages. And I can't think of any strong need for consistency in stub category names, unlike templates (although if there is, they could all be renamed to 'television series', which is used by most the main categories). Rename. -Mairi 05:02, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Rename' render unto the US etc etc etc. Grutness...wha? 07:42, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:United States television series stubs - SoM 21:06, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- Mmm... what about stubs for one-off specials? I think "...programs" is the better name to cover all bases. Grutness...wha? 00:22, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Definitely rename to program. As for series v. programs why not just United States television stubs without narrowing it any moe than that. jengod 20:48, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Because then you'll get personalities, stations, etc etc etc. Grutness...wha? 22:49, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Rename "program" -Eisnel 17:19, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
- Rename from "programme" to "program". Telestylo 20:30, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
October 12th
Created as a new stub type by a new WikiProject, who didn't realise there were naming guidelines for stubs. It's now been moved to {{NewHampshire-stub}}, leaving this incorrectly named redirect which should be deleted. Grutness...wha? 06:22, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
October 13th
Delete. This was discussed jointly with the state park stub last month; let's discuss them one at a time. The Cat:State forest stubs category is empty; in my opinion it should not exist because any state forest article stub in the future should go into the appropriate stub category for the geographic region. — Fingers-of-Pyrex 12:29, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. The reason this is empty is that all that was in there were a handful of lists and - as has been discussed elsewhere, lists (by definition) are not stubs. They were better served by the new Cat:Lists of U.S. state forests by state, where they 9and all the other similar lists I could find) now reside. It's far more likely that editors will know stubs about specific states than about forests nationwide, anyway. Grutness...wha? 12:50, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete; this is unnecessary. --Alynna 00:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- delete why keep it if noones using it. BL kiss the lizard 08:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
We definitely follow a standard of always using a national noun rather than a national adjective in the stub template. The consensus seems that it would be a good idea to do the same with the categories, and since changing the stub will require restubbing anyway, it would be best to change the category at the same time if it is to be done. Caerwine 16:00, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- A definite rename for the template. A weaker one for the category - we've got an awful lot of categories named like this, and "Sweden politician stubs" does sound a little stilted. Nouns seems a good way to go, though - although we also need to keep in mind the names of the main categories they're based on. I'm...just unsure. Grutness...wha? 23:03, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- I suppose we could always follow the single example of Cat:People from Quebec stubs and go for something like Cat:Politicians from Sweden stubs if we value euphony over brevity. Caerwine 20:13, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
- Definitely rename the template, but the category doesn't seem to do much harm as it is, and personally, I'd try to stay consistent with Category:Swedish politicians. Robert 00:22, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
{{Swedish-politician-stub}} has been orphaned. Consensu semmed to be to keep Cat:Swedish politican stubs so I left it alone. Caerwine 03:31, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Only the template was renamed; the category was kept as it was. Mairi 18:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
I created this category in order to reduce the load of {{footy-stub}}. However, I forgot to take into consideration the problems with the term "football" in the American context. The current category name does not make it clear enough that the articles are about what in the US would be called soccer clubs, so I request a rename for this category. Aecis 23:04, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Sounds fair... the non-stub category this relates to is "United States soccer clubs", so I'd probably go for that one. Then again... the original proposal had the parentheses... sigh. A rename is definite, but... which to? Grutness...wha? 10:46, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'd say Cat:United States soccer club stubs - "football (soccer)" is only really necessary if the category covers an area where both terms are used. sjorford #£@%&$?! 15:37, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
- I would say Cat:United States football (soccer) club stubs, for two reasons. Firstly because the article about the sport is called "football (soccer)", and not for instance Association Football (the official name of the sport), and secondly, because the category is a daughter of Cat:Football (soccer) stubs. Aecis 20:07, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
- That's not necessary - there are plenty of articles that say just "football" or "soccer" in the right context. The only ones that don't are those that cover football throughout the world, where either name might be used. See for example, Category:Football (soccer) by country - all use one term or the other (apart from Category:Canadian football (soccer), which probably ought to be changed). sjorford #£@%&$?! 19:36, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
- You're absolutely right about the use of football and/or soccer. And you're also right when you say that it's not really necessary to use the word football. Soccer in itself is clear and unambiguous enough. The category itself imo definitely needs soccer in the name, because it relates to the US of A. I still think that using the word "football" might be desirable though, if just for the sake of some consistency. Aecis 22:42, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
October 14th
Another one for pruning. This category has had less than 10 entries for several months now, as per this diff. I propose this be deleted, and the stubs merged into its parent, {{MEast-bio-stub}} |
