Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

NOTE: This page is not a forum to suggest the creation of articles. If you wish to create an article on any subject, go to Wikipedia:Articles for creation and follow the instructions there.

Interpreter stubs[edit]

See The cat "Chinese interpreter stubs" was deleted, but none of the possible associated actions were taken. I tweaked the stub template but was reluctant to create the new cat. Do feel free to change it further. All the best: Rich Farmbrough00:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC).

Deletion nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types[edit]

Please note that Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types and its suybpages have been nominated for deletion. Feel free to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:18, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Noone? Would really like to see ANY comments on the MFD. — xaosflux Talk 02:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Stubs about Wikipedia[edit]

I've just come across the category Category:Stubs about Wikipedia, because it's appeared in Wikipedia:Database reports/Dubious stub categories today; previously it was absent. It was copy/paste moved from Category:Wikipedia stubs on 30 June 2014 following discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 June 20#Category:Wikipedia stubs. The category is populated by {{Wikipedia-stub}} and so the cat name no longer follows the naming convention for stub cats. It concerns me that this naming convention was not respected, that this project was not informed, and that the participants in that CFD ( (talk), Sillyfolkboy (talk · contribs), (talk), RevelationDirect (talk · contribs), and closer Good Olfactory (talk · contribs)) do not appear to be regularly involved in stub sorting.

As to the intent of {{Wikipedia-stub}}, it's clear to me that it's for articles about Wikipedia itself, not articles hosted on Wikipedia. It appears that some people - including the CFD participants - believed it to be a general-purpose stub template like {{stub}}, so I've cleared up this lot (the usage of {{Wikipedia-stub}} will need checking again every few months}. That belief is echoed by the CFD nominator's rationale: 'Since all stub categories are Wikipedia administritive categories, and many of the administritive categories have "Wikipedia" in front of their names, this category looks like it means "Articles in this category are stubs on Wikipedia".' The fact that it had no subcategories, and therefore does not encompass "all stub categories", seems to have escaped notice. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:42, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

@Redrose64: I think the rationale stands, regardless of my involvement in stub sorting. Categories (whatever their purpose) really need to relate their meaning in a simple and unambiguous manner. "Stubs about Wikipedia" does a much better job of this than "Wikipedia stubs". As a general rule, people shouldn't have to consult the category page to understand its meaning. I do not see the divergence from naming convention as an issue – conventions are there to promote good practice, but where a convention's application is to the detriment of their purpose (i.e. making things clear for users) then we should diverge from it. Hopefully, this change will almost certainly remove the need for clean-up work at "Wikipedia stubs" caused by good-intentioned editors confronted with an ambiguous title. SFB 09:24, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
What you're suggesting would have repercussions across the whole of the Category:Top-level stub categories tree. By your arguments, Category:Commerce stubs‎ should be Category:Stubs about commerce; Category:Culture stubs‎ should be Category:Stubs about culture; Category:Education stubs‎ should be Category:Stubs about education, etc. This is a huge request: there are 21 top-level stub categories, all bar one of which has at least one level of sub-cat. There are over 600 second-level stub cats, and the whole tree comes in at something over 12,000 cats. I do not think that a general change to the naming convention would be beneficial. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:08, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
That is not the scope of either the first or the second proposal. By my argument, Category:Commerce stubs‎ stays at Category:Commerce stubs‎ because no one could possibly confuse it with anything else. The stub nomenclature works fine but starting a category with "Wikipedia" is a special case given that we use it as an administrative prefix (e.g. Category:Wikipedia tools). Hence, on its own, there is the confusion over whether "Wikipedia stubs" would regard (a) stubs about wikipedia, or (b) be the top administrative category for stub articles on Wikipedia. The logic is not that "stubs about X" is superior to "x stubs" generally. SFB 13:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Background The CfD process currently requires a tag to be placed on category. I usually go further by tagging a WikiProject and the original category creator as a courtesy but this is optional at this time. Thanks for your input on the link above.RevelationDirect (talk) 18:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

@Sillyfolkboy, RevelationDirect, Redrose64, Dawynn: FYI, I have made a nomination to rename and rescope Category:Stubs about Wikipedia due to its small size; this should also deal with the issue of ambiguity which caused the mentioned rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:11, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
I just found and fixed another misuse of {{Wikipedia-stub}}. If the category is to be renamed again, perhaps the template should be renamed to match it. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
I've added my input now, to the same effect. SFB 15:34, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, provide feedback on the nomination. RevelationDirect (talk) 16:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Large People stubs backlog[edit]

There is a large backlog of 700+ pages in Category:People stubs that could do with clearing as ideally there would be no pages in it. Just thought I'd bring it to your attention. Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 15:04, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Why not adopt a letter of the alphabet? There are no unsorted People stubs filing under "P": that's my little patch. (I also sometimes trawl through the ones who have bracketed disambiguation, stub-sorting them while checking that they're linked from the base name via a hatnote or dab page entry.) PamD 15:54, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Complete template list is up for deletion[edit]

Please note that Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Complete template list is up for deletion; feel free to comment about it at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Complete template list. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:12, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Diplomat stubs[edit]

I noticed that the diplomat stub templates like {{India-diplomat-stub}} add the articles to the respective "politician stubs" categories (here Category:Indian politician stubs). Is that appropriate? Is diplomacy considered a subset of politics? Personally I don't think that quite fits. For comparison, Category:Diplomats is not a sub-category of Category:Politicians. Huon (talk) 19:09, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Any diplomat will need to be a politician of some sort, otherwise we'd have wars breaking out all over the place. Anyway, the top-level {{Diplomat-stub}} populates Category:Diplomat stubs, which is in Category:Political people stubs; and we find a parallel as the templates and cats get increasingly more specific, down to {{England-diplomat-stub}} which populates Category:English diplomat stubs, which is in Category:English politician stubs. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Stub tags by year/decade/century[edit]

Currently, for these tags, we have 2 basic patterns:

I think we should standardize all of these - probably accoreding to the first pattern, because of the stub tag name structure ({{France-painter-17thC-stub}} is a type of {{France-painter-stub}}, not of {{painter-17thC-stub}}). Anyone else have an opinion here? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:22, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

It has been my experience that stub tags are categorized by topic, and that time is added only if the category is so large that it needs to be broken down into subcategories. Therefore, I agree that the {{time-topic-stub}} format is preferable, and {{France-painter-17thC-stub}} should probably be renamed to {{17thC-France-painter-stub}}, since the category is a sub of Category:French painter stubs. Fortdj33 (talk) 12:37, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Stub type sizes page broken[edit]

I'm not sure what triggers the rebuild of this page, but it hasn't updated since June. Can someone investigate and revive the automatic monthly build of this page? Dawynn (talk) 11:31, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

The data comes from a subpage, Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub type sizes/data, which was built on the 10th of each month by BernsteinBot (talk · contribs). Many of the reports built by BernsteinBot have not been updated since 1 July 2014, because that is when Toolserver went down permanently. I believe that each individual report needs to be rewritten before it can be run again, so the person to ask is MZMcBride (talk · contribs), who is the operator of BernsteinBot. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:50, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

New task for MoohanBOT[edit]

I have just filed a bot request for a new task for MoohanBOT. MoohanBOT currently performs minor stub sorting tasks, retagging biography articles from {{stub}} to {{bio-stub}}. The new functionality I have proposed will enable the bot to sort articles relating to British, English, Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish people into more specific categories. If the bot is accepted and works as planned there is scope to expand this method to other geographic regions. Your input would be appreciated on the request page! Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 11:38, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Petersburg Census Area replaced with Petersburg Borough[edit]

This CFD clears up a long-standing problem needing correcting, in that the Petersburg Census Area, Alaska ceased to exist when the Petersburg Borough was incorporated nearly two years ago. {{PetersburgAK-geo-stub}} should be changed to reflect the current subdivision. I'll do it myself if necessary, but I thought I would offer notice here first. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:29, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Lapland geography stubs[edit]

Category:Lapland geography stubs was recently moved to Category:Lapland (Finland) geography stubs. Since Lapland is ambiguous, I renamed {{Lapland-geo-stub}} to {{LaplandFI-geo-stub}}, without a discussion (I considered it routine cleanup, but I should know better...), but now I am not sure what to do with {{Lapland-geo-stub}}. It could be converted to a disambiguation page if we create a template for Lapland (Sweden), or it could be a general template for Lapland (region), but I know that it should not redirect to the Finland template. I am willing to fix/reverse anything I've broken. Any suggestions? Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:03, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages are (mostly) in article space, but {{Lapland-geo-stub}} is a template: very few templates are set up with the intent of offering dab choices. One example is {{sandbox}}, but I really don't think that we should set up stub templates like that. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:07, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
I see the logic behind your position. Would it be better just to delink and delete the template? -- Black Falcon (talk) 04:52, 9 December 2014 (UTC)