Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting

---

---

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.

---

---

3.7 Monthly Newspaper Topic Request

99.194.217.121 (talk) 02:49, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Huh? Grutness...wha? 09:11, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

New report idea

Please discuss the feasibility of this idea:

It would be *nice* (although, potentially difficult) to have a periodic list of all templates that pass the following criteria:

1. template name ends in '-stub'
2. template is transcluded on at least 60 articles
3. template is *not* found on the newstub= field of any...
   • {{stub category}}
   • {{regional stub category}}
   • {{parent-only stub category}}

This report would list templates that are ripe for splitting into categories of their own. Dawynn (talk) 18:15, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Mmmm. Yeah, that would point out a lot of viable new categories... Grutness...wha? 02:09, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Hum .. I can't precisely manage that, but can run a very similar query: "Titles ending in '-stub' that are not linked to from any category page that transcludes {{stub category}}, {{regional stub category}} or {{parent-only stub category}}". Report is posted at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Uncatted stubs. - TB (talk) 18:51, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, this is useful - but the result gives a lot of redirects: is there any way to fold these into where they redirect? Severo^TC 20:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

"Templates that are not redirects and that have titles ending in '-stub' that are not linked to from any category page that transcludes {{stub category}}, {{regional stub category}} or {{parent-only stub category}}". List updated - 287 entries on it now compared to the 591 before. - TB (talk) 16:36, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Getting better but it's still tripping over template redirects a bit - now I notice that if a template redirect is linked on {{Stub category}} (let's say {{Euro-foo-stub}} instead of the template {{Europe-foo-stub}}), it brings up the template anyway. I wish I could be more helpful but I have zero experience working with the database dumps. Severo^TC 17:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

So .. a categeory linking to a redirect to a template is sufficient to exclude that template from the report ? That's doable. Watch this space. - TB (talk) 17:22, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I think that's right: basically I think what we're interested in here is how many times {{Europe-foo-stub}} is transcluded in total (directly or through redirects), because the existence of {{Euro-foo-stub}} doesn't really matter too much. Severo^TC 17:53, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

(A list of template redirects linked from category pages would also be useful I guess, as one place we do want to update their usage (i.e bypass the redirect) is on the category page which gives editors advice on how to use the templates. Severo^TC 17:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC))

Okay, updated. Elimiating templates linked to from category pages via redirects reduced the list from 287 to 187, but counting transclusions viua redirects towards the 60 limit increased this again to 219. I'll look into listing categories making use of the three named templates above linking to stub templates via redirects in a separate list. - TB (talk) 18:04, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The list of categories advising to link to a redirect rather than directly to a stub template is up at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stubs catted via redirects. Enjoy. - TB (talk) 18:48, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Would anyone have any objections if I were to bypass the redirects on the category pages, so that the links provided as guidance to editors were of the template, not the redirect (and match what is listed at the top of the category listing)? Severo^TC 16:27, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Cool! I ask for one report, afraid that it would be too cumbersome to build -- and I get two reports! Great work. Can we make these run on a regular basis? (No more than weekly, no less than once a month, please) Dawynn (talk) 15:31, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Rebuilding instructions for both reports are posted at the bottom of each. Anyone with toolserver access should be able to run them as needed - it's a five minute job. I'll keep this page on my watchlist, or you can of course post on my talk page to request a refresh. - TB (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Problem. Not sure how Wikipedia does everything behind the scenes, but it seems to sometimes credit articles tagged to redirects to both the redirect and the true template. Which means that a simple add function will produce an inflated count. Not sure how to work around that, but feel free to review {{oceania-hotel-stub}} as an example. Dawynn (talk) 18:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Checking the database directly (as the report does), I see that {{Oceania-hotel-stub}} has 33 transclusions and {{Oceania-hotel-struct-stub}} 32 right now. The report lists 65 total, which agrees with this. Pages that link to "Template:Oceania-hotel-stub" shows both tranclusions ({{ }}) and links ([[ ]]), listing 77 in total. Counting by hand I see the same number of translusions (33 and 32) and an additional 8 and 4 links. 33 + 32 + 8 + 4 = 77. - TB (talk) 19:39, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Take a moment to look closer. Going back to Pages that link to "Template:Oceania-hotel-stub", you see something like this:

• Menen Hotel
• Vaiaku Lagi Hotel
• OD-N-Aiwo Hotel

. . .

• Template:Oceania-hotel-struct-stub
  • Menen Hotel
  • Vaiaku Lagi Hotel
  • OD-N-Aiwo Hotel

Again, I don't know why, say, the Menen Hotel is listed as being tagged by both templates when its truly only tagged by the redirect, but that's the way it is. There is only one Menen Hotel article, not two. It shouldn't be counted twice. I'm not sure how "Jarry" counts transclusions, but the "Transclusion count" link gives an accurate count of the true transclusions (33). Dawynn (talk) 00:44, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Ah - I see your point now. Short answer is Mediawiki is weird about counting links, I just go with that weirdness. Ultimately it's a flaw in the MediaWiki software on which Wikipedia runs - see bug #12019; the semantics of one of the underlying database table have been muddled by a bit of lazy development. Nobody has (yet) been brave enough to fix this.

For your example, both 33 and 65 are estimates, although in this case the 33 is a rather good one ;) - TB (talk) 06:52, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I have made a number of changes, based on these reports. I'd like to see them run again, when you have a chance. (Even if the count issue is not fixed) Dawynn (talk) 12:44, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Lists

Remind me: can a list be a stub, or not? An editor/bot has recently tagged a whole lot of lists as stubs: I had thought that a list could not be a stub, but can't find chapter and verse to support this and am suddenly wondering. PamD 14:38, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:Stub, "Similarly, stub status usually depends on the length of prose text alone – lists, templates, images, and other such peripheral parts of an article are usually not considered when judging whether an article is a stub." That being the case, list articles would all be stubs. In order to avoid this, I think we've generally agreed that lists are not stubs.

I also base my conclusion on the fact that "List" and "Stub" are two distinct grades in Wikipedia:Assessment. And there is no "Stub list" class. So, again, lists and stubs are two separate things. Dawynn (talk) 16:08, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

VIPUL PRATAP SINGH

File:Example.jpgVipul Pratap Singh was born in 24 May 1984 and is the elder child of smt.Vijay Laxmi and Shri.R.B.Atal(doctor). She spent her early childhood at the Lucknow

Career He had completed bachelor in pharmacy from "UPTU" Uttar pradesh jhansi.after completion of cource completed Pharma management and administration degree After completed research training in clinical trail where they learn the clinical pathological remedies.now day he is working in ORGANIC INDIA as executive scientist --223.189.100.138 (talk) 18:29, 17 September 2011 (UTC)www.vipulhealthclub.spruz.com

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. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:24, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Stubs don't work

The Europe rail transport stub does not work. Neither "Europe-rail-stub" or "Europe-rail-transport-stub" as given in the stub article work; I tried to use both for ASVi museum. Hugo999 (talk) 22:27, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

• Seems OK now. PamD 22:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Scotland-Olympic-medalist-stub

Not too familiar with stub creation process so I wonder if someone could kindly add {{Scotland-Olympic-medalist-stub}} to your discovery page. Created by Mais oui! (talk · contribs) without recourse to Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, it needs careful consideration as Scotland is not an Olympic nation. Tim! (talk) 07:18, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Timothy Elie Girard

United States Army, SFC Retired — Preceding unsigned comment added by Girard01 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Stub template list?

Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub type sizes provides a monthly list of all stub categories. Where could one find a list of all stub templates? 216.188.204.25 (talk) 12:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

At WP:STUBS. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

No. That's a manually updated resource. In fact, that's part of *why* I'm looking for a full list -- so we can look at updating this resource. 216.188.204.25 (talk) 14:59, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

WT:STUBS is the official list. A number of stub templates which do exist were created out of process, i.e. they were not proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, or they were proposed there but not subsequently approved. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:12, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Or, as often happens, they were approved, and created, but the creator never took the time to list them. The same problem happens with the categories. Some get created without going through the proper channels, some get created with all proper authority. But the approval status of the categories has no bearing on whether they've been added to the list. Some that have not been properly approved are on the list, some that have been approved are not on the list -- again because this is a manual process and depends on creators to actually list their creations. 216.188.204.25 (talk) 16:54, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind. Found what I was looking for: Category:Stub message boxes. 216.188.204.25 (talk) 16:57, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Italian musicians

We have {{Italy-music-bio-stub}}, which categorises into both Category:Italian people stubs and Category:Music biography stubs; and we have {{Italy-musician-stub}}, which categorises into Category:Italian musician stubs. Is there some subtle distinction that should be noted on the relevant cat pages? --Redrose64 (talk) 18:16, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I would guess that a musician would be someone known for ability to play an instrument. (I have seen that, historically, the voice is considered an instrument for WPSS -- so singers are musicians) Anything else related to music would be music-bio. A record producer, or someone known for composing music, but not necessarily for playing would qualify as music-bio. 216.188.204.25 (talk) 15:21, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I've tried to straighten up the European music categories. The main category was correct, and the nationals should follow. For Italy it should look something like this:

• Category:Italian music biography stubs / {{Italy-music-bio-stub}} (23 P)
  • Category:Italian composer stubs / {{Italy-composer-stub}}
  • Category:Italian musician stubs / {{Italy-musician-stub}}
  • {{Italy-conductor-stub}} (upmerge) (39 P)

Just need a proposal for the new parent category. Should be speediable with the two full categories, and two half-full templates. 216.188.204.25 (talk) 17:49, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Template:Illinois-geo-stub

{{Illinois-geo-stub}} seems unseemly large. The current picture (changed in June 2011 to the current one) leaves a huge amount of whitespace.

See this triple instance:

76.65.128.198 (talk) 11:52, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

I have removed it. images are not actually needed and they do clutter the place up if there are too many stub messages. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Non-approved stub: Nuclide-stub

See template:Nuclide-stub. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:01, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Taken to WP:SFD. Severo^TC 13:13, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Size of stub categories

Hi! Can someone tell me whether there is a minimum size for stub categories below which {{popstub}} is added? I always thought it was 30, but I can't find the relevant page. The template was recently added to Category:Systemic hormonal preparation stubs (after I had removed it) which has 48 entries. I think it's unlikely that more than a couple of additional articles will turn up in the near future. Thanks --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 10:11, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

"Threshold" is usually 60. Categories with less than 50 can expect {{popstub}} to be added. Cateories with 50-59 are in the danger zone - not usually deleted, but rarely approved for creation. If a category is unlikely to grow beyond 50, it should probably be deleted and the template upmerged to the next category higher. Severo^TC 10:51, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, perhaps I can find a few more. It would a pity to delete it, since it's part of a series of ATC code based categories in WP:PHARM. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 11:36, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

It would also get lost in Category:Pharmacology stubs - perhaps, judging by permcats, an Category:Endocrinology stubs or similar would be useful and a better home for it? (My knowledge in this area is only based upon the permcats though :) ) Severo^TC 11:43, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Hm. That would break the (useful, in my opinion) distinction between pharmaceutical stubs (WP:PHARM, Category:Pharmacology stubs descendants) and medical ones (WP:MED, Category:Medicine stubs descendants). Will look for some more stubs fitting in that category when I have time. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 17:08, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Norwegian politician template ambiguity.

Please see this discussion. Its an August discussion that needs clarification of a typo before closing the discussion. Dawynn (talk) 18:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Stubs cleared

The stub category has been full of entries for a good month, not least since a particular editor had a blitz of creating stubs (consisting largely of a scatter of google hits) in early December. But the category is now empty - User:KConWiki did a blitz overnight and I finished it off just now. It won't stay empty for long but will be less dispiriting now that we've sorted all of that batch of well-intended trash. PamD 10:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Administrative help!

We could really use an administrator to come help clear the Deletion log. We have requests dating back to November that need a final decision and processing. Dawynn (talk) 15:09, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Taiwan stubs

While I understand that ROC-related stubs are most likely going to be taken care of by Taiwan-based editors or editors interested in Taiwan-related topics, it is going to be problematic to have 'Taiwan' shown in articles unrelated to Taiwan, and it possibly violates existing NPOV policies which stipulate that 'Republic of China' should be used for anything related to the ROC yet unrelated to Taiwan. These include geo-stubs and road-stubs related to locations on Kinmen, Matsu, Wuchiu, Pratas, bio-stubs related to ROC generals and marshals who have never set foot on Taiwan, university-stubs for universities that were not re-established in Taiwan after 1949, and so on and so forth. Should this be solved by having a separate set of ROC-something-stub templates, or by adding an option in the Taiwan-something stub templates so that 'Republic of China' instead of 'Taiwan' will be shown in the tagged articles? 203.98.184.99 (talk) 16:10, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an expert in Taiwan, RoC and pre-1949 issues. However, I don't see an issue in template names. The wording of the text in the template can be altered to be desirable and the categories don't need to have identical names either. Severo^TC 13:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Should an option be added within the existing Taiwan stub templates? Or should another set of templates be created? I agree that they can be fed into the same categories. 59.188.42.121 (talk) 16:38, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

This IP user can be ignored. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

Help with Category:Stub message boxes needing attention

Could someone please review the logic behind Category:Stub message boxes needing attention? There are several templates marked as either containing Non-existent categories, or Category names that don't end with Stubs. These seem to be misflagged, as the templates do not reflect either of these issues. (The Broken image tags all seem correct, and I've been correcting those) Dawynn (talk) 11:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I did some spot checking and found these issues were occurring on recently created/changed templates (from which I would infer job queue issues). Have you found any where the issue is long standing? Severo^TC 13:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

The Ns I don't know the cause, but I've fixed them by carrying out a WP:NULLEDIT, having found that WP:PURGE didn't work.

I've found that one of the Ss is caused by a mysterious non-displaying character appearing somewhere adjacent to, or within, the word stubs which causes one extra character to be counted, so that the technique

• remove the last six characters from the category
• add back on a single space and the word "stubs"
• is the category unchanged?

detects that the two categories are not identical, so it assumes that the original didn't end in " stubs".

To fix this, I am presently re-entering the cats, like this. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Y Done, see here. Only three left: one B and two genuine Ss. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

That B has now been fixed. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:12, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Question about a specific stub

Hey, I recently came across the Libya-judo-bio-stub, and I was wondering why it even exists? It is only on one page, and from what I can tell, that isn't going to change any time soon. Putting the under the Libya-sport-bio-stub category would seem to make more sense, seeing as there are only twenty in that stub category it isn't overly large. I was just wondering if there was another reason for it to exist. Thanks in advance! Jeancey (talk) 20:41, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Why would {{Libya-sport-bio-stub}} be better? Why not {{Africa-judo-bio-stub}} instead? The person fits both, after all. The template {{Libya-judo-bio-stub}} covers the intersection of those, and I imagine that it was created for that very reason - to avoid the need to put both {{Africa-judo-bio-stub}} and {{Libya-sport-bio-stub}} onto articles. Although there is only one current use, the template was created in 2008, when there may have been many more than one candidate for its use. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:32, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I was just wondering. I had no idea what the process was for these things, so I thought I would ask. Thanks for clearing it up! Jeancey (talk) 21:34, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Help with report refresh

Need someone with experience with auto-generated reports to investigate. This report did not refresh for January:

• Wikipedia:Database reports/Stubs included directly in stub categories

Can we please correct the issue so that we can get back to monthly updates? Dawynn (talk) 10:57, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

It's built by BernsteinBot (talk · contribs), which is operated by MZMcBride (talk · contribs) - I have left a message. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:13, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Spacing betwen stub tags

From the look of Tree planting bar, either {{forestry-stub}} or {{tool-stub}} has something the matter with their spacing - there's a gap between the two as displayed. Someone might like to take a look and fix one of them? Thanks. PamD 14:04, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Y Fixed, see here. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - Tree planting bar looks much tidier now! PamD 23:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

WP Stub Sorting in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Stub Sorting for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 23:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

England Test Crickter Stubs

Typing {{England-Test-cricket-bio-stub}} produces a Category called "England Test Crickter stubs", which is apparently on 141 different articles. Whether we need such a category (no other cricketing nation has such a stub category) is one point; more obviously, we should spell "cricketer" correctly. When I tried to make this do that, it spat it back at me, so I've brought it here. Johnlp (talk) 08:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

The scope of the category is well within stub sorting norms. The name of the category is obviously wrong! So, as renaming categories is an administrative function, I've posted it at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion (for renaming, not deletion). Severo^TC 08:58, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Johnlp (talk) 09:09, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Category sort of stub categories

Stub categories were sorted under µ in [1] in 2005. µ was chosen at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/Archive 6#Very unhappy with over promotion of stub-categories with the rationale: How about using µ, as in "micro-articles"? Quote from Micro: "More generally, the prefix means 'very small'. However, a change in the category software means that lower case letters in other alphabets are now displayed as upper case in category headings. The lower case Greek µ is displayed as the upper case Greek version Μ which looks like a Latin M. See for example Category:Sport in Serbia. The Greek Μ sorts after the Latin letters but it's confusing that it looks like the Latin letter, and the association with micro is lost. In fact the Latin M means mega- which signals the opposite of stubs. Here are some links showing the confusion with the Latin letter: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/Archive 16#Categorization of stub categories, Template talk:Stub category#Sorting, Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Wayward letter heading on category page. I think the character should be changed to something still sorting after Latin letters but not looking like a Latin letter. I suggest Σ (sigma) because it carries the 'S' sound as in stub. Σ is used for summation in mathematics. It can be discussed whether this association is good or bad, but most people probably don't know that meaning anyway. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not even sure about Σ because it could still confuse people (well, it would confuse me) who aren't familiar with how the sorting is handled. Although it would be an improvement, in principle I don't like hacky workarounds like this. How about using some special indicator like {{other}} which displays under a heading Other at the end of the items? I've no idea what the coding or processing implications might be, though.--A bit iffy (talk) 16:27, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what {{other}} has to do with this. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:47, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

To clarify my suggestion of {{other}}: I don't mean the existing "For other uses..." template, I mean just something else other than a letter i.e. some indicator other than a letter. Anyway, it seems that the software won't allow something like I suggest.--A bit iffy (talk) 17:36, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

The software only allows one character to be displayed. If it's a letter it has to be upper case. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:58, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

There is tradition for using Greek letters. Wikipedia:Categorization#Sort keys says:

• To place entries after the main alphabetical list, use sort keys beginning with tilde ("~"). Other characters used for this purpose are "µ" (mu), used to place stub categories at the end of subcategory lists; "β" (beta) for Wikipedia books; "Ι" (iota) for images; "Ρ" (rho) for portals; "Τ" (tau) for templates; and "Ω" (omega) for WikiProjects.

The software change means that β is displayed as Β, for example in Category:History. Several of the mentioned Greek letters look like Latin letters, but it's less confusing when it's a logical letter like B for books, I for images, P for portals, T for templates. Using the Greek version of S for stubs makes sense to me in this context. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:24, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I think this is a good idea! It has looked odd since the software change a few months back. Severo^TC 21:01, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I think it's really confusing to have letters which look like Latin letters appearing "out of alphabetical order" at the end of the category (even if they are "logical" like B for books). I'd suggest using sort keys for stubs/portals/templates which don't end up looking like Latin letters, e.g. Σ (sigma), "Ω" (omega), etc. Alternately, could we get "the software" changed so it works the way it used to (was it even an intentional change in the first place?) DH85868993 (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it was an intentional change, which occurred late February/early March 2011, soon after (but not part of) the MediaWiki 1.17 deployment. The primary intention was to make category sorting case-insensitive, so that kludges like {{DEFAULTSORT:Liberty Head Nickel}} (as seen on Liberty Head nickel) would not be required. An effect of this was that sortkeys beginning "a", "b" and "c" would now sort with "A", "B" and "C" instead of after "X", "Y" and "Z" as previous. This means that 26 letter headings are now needed for Latin letters, instead of 52. Greek letters always sorted after Latin, and suffered from the same problem: "α", "β" and "γ" sorted after "Χ" "Ψ" "Ω", but now sort with "Α" "Β" "Γ". The databases took several days to rebuild, which is why the initial problems described at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 87#categorically random categories appeared. It was known at the time that its effects would be irreversible, so no, it's not going to be changed back. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Given that's the situation then I support PrimeHunter's suggestion of using Σ as the sort key for stub categories. DH85868993 (talk) 01:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd agree that Σ would be much less confusing than the Μ which looks so like M. PamD 13:10, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

None of all th1s would be an issue if we stick the stub categories in the related WikiProject category. I have suggested this on a couple of occasions in the past without success. Having stubs categories in content categories is "odd". I know that it is done to promote the expansion of stub articles but do we know whether that aim is achieved? And since the WikiProject categories and template categories are not in content categories, why are the stub categories mixed in with content? I know the answer to that question: it is because that is how it has always been done. I think the WikiProject and template categories were created after the category system was instigated whereas that stubs existed before then. One odd quirk of having stub cats in with content cats is that we can end up with a category have one subcat and the subcat is a stub category! I have only stuck this once however. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Template categories are sometimes included in content categories, e.g. Category:Motorsport templates is included in Category:Motorsport. DH85868993 (talk) 05:00, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Having template categories in content categories is not common. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikiproject banners are placed on talk pages, therefore their categories contain only talk pages. Stub templates are only used in article space, therefore stub categories will only contain article space pages. There is also no direct relationship between stub templates and WikiProjects: it has been stated before that stub templates do not belong to any WikiProject except WP:WSS. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

The WikiProject banners are a red herring in this discussion as is the fact that stubs are only used in article namespace. As for the claim that there is no direct relationship between stub templates and WikiProjects, that is not strictly true. Here are some examples:

Category:WikiProject Science and Category:Science stubs

Category:WikiProject Geography and Category:Geography stubs

Category:WikiProject New Zealand and Category:New Zealand stubs

Category:WikiProject Sports and Category:Sports stubs

Category:WikiProject Football and Category:Football stubs

These are examples that I tried without putting any effort into looking at the WikiProject and stub sorting category hierarchy. As you can see there is a direct relationship between the two. There would be stubs categories that do not have this direct relationship but but they can simply be assigned to the most appropriate WikiProject(s). It is high time that stub sorting and WikiProjects were intermeshed. I am certain that if this is done the ultimate aim of improving stubs will be incrementally approached. Finally, what has been stated before is not relevant. WP is forever changing and we have to make sure that all of the component parts of WP change to improve it for readers. Imagine how it would be if WP still had CamelCase? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Stub Type Sizes page code

Could someone please look into how this page is generated? I noticed, even on the first day it was posted, several of the page counts seemed to be way off (more significantly than would occur through normal editing). In fact, the first two categories listed have negative article counts. Dawynn (talk) 12:27, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Have you contacted the bot operator? --Redrose64 (talk) 14:54, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Parent-only stub category missing parameters

Please add the "category type" and "WikiProject" parameters to template {{Parent-only stub category}} to bring it in line with the main {{Stub category}} template. Dawynn (talk) 23:02, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Y Done, see here and here. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:28, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Three different stubs produce the same stub category

All articles tagged with the folliowing 3 stubs end up in the same (too large) stub category:

• Template:Washington-bio-stub
• Template:Washington-stub
• Template:Washington-newspaper-stub

Just wondering why that is. Thanks in advance Ottawahitech (talk) 23:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

195 pages is not overlarge. These are what we call "upmerged categories": at the time that the stub templates were created, it was felt that the 60-article minimum could not yet be achieved. If you can now identify 60 or so articles in this category which are biographical, or 60+ which relate to newspapers, then we can create a sub-category. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals#"Speedy creation" item S1. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:40, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. I guess what I am looking for is how to find articless that I might be able to contribute to. For example, if I had knowledge about living people who live in Washington State, but was presented with a list of 195 articles that included a whole bunch of sports events and other topics that I know nothing about, as is the case in the stub category I was asking about I would not find navigating the stub categories an efficient way to find articles to contribute to.

Sorry for the long-winded way of describing what I am getting at. Did I make myself clear? Ottawahitech (talk) 17:41, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

You could use the WhatLinksHere feature - Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Washington-bio-stub - this will tell you all the articles that include {{Washington-bio-stub}}. In this case, there aren't that many (14) which is why we don't have a separate category. (Possibly there aren't that many because all articles are already large enough not to be stubs, or possible because not all articles have been tagged). Severo^TC 19:03, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Also, you could try CatScan eg [2] - although this search may need some refining. Severo^TC 19:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I will have to try those two types of links for a few days, to see if it helps me narrow down areas that I may be able to contribute to. btw as far as using the Tool at [3] I see two problems:

• It takes too long to get results
• It is quite complicated to set up to get the exact results one is looking for imo. Ottawahitech (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't think we have ever created a category about living people who live in a particular area. That's too high maintenance. Even the non-stub categories don't keep track of where living people are residing. But, based on this conversation, I started to fill out the {{Washington-bio-stub}}, and found that the topic was greatly undersorted. There is now a Category:Washington (state) people stubs‎. I based my tagging on people born in the state of Washington. There is also a sub-category about Washington politicians, which I'm sure is based more on whether the politician represented the state of Washington, regardless of where the person was born. Dawynn (talk) 10:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Stub size clarification

I'm trying to find the source of the scope guideline of 60 articles for a stub. I realize the number has to be set somewhere, but how was 60 met, and are there exceptions? For example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting lists Category:Virginia geography stubs in Category:Overpopulated stub categories. Virginia has 95 counties and 40 independent cities that are essentially the same as counties, thus there could be 135 stubs. Only 17 have over the 50-page deletion guideline. That leaves 118 potential categories that are instead merged into the parent category of Virginia geography stubs. Say each of those stubs has only 10 associated articles, that would mean 1,180 pages going into Category:Virginia geography stubs. Another example of a category desperately in need of subcats is Category:United States history stubs with 623 pages, plus subcategories for US history books, US military history, and Old West. That category has everything from colonial settlements to Cold War tactics. My interest is in working on those stubs pertaining to the American Founding. I don't recognize on sight every article that touches on that time period, and with 623 it's time-consuming to click every link.

WP:DIFFUSE does not give a limit to the size of categories, leaving only the guidance on the banner, "subcategories may be helpful for browsing." If we are ok with Virginia geography stubs having 800 plus articles, that's cool with me. Category:American films has over 24,000 pages, but it also has 21 subcategories to help navigation. Leaving 800 pages in Virginia geography stubs does not make it easy for someone who might want to expand related articles. Say an editor wants to expand articles related to {cl|Spotsylvania County, Virginia geography stubs}}, 39 page listings will get lost among 800.

One possibility is to break up the county stubs into categories for region, which is partially in place. Still Category:Northern Virginia geography stubs has only 106 pages, while Category:Southwest Virginia geography stubs has 294. Also, those counties in the regional categories Would an exception be advantageous to editors in cases where stub categories have high cumulative article count? When a stub category has a large and wide variety of pages, there needs to a better system of identifying what those stubs really are. Cheers. Encycloshave (talk) 19:14, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

60 articles isn't a maximum, it's a minimum used as a threshold to decide if a new stub cat would be warranted. Also please note that Category:Overpopulated stub categories isn't automatic, it just means that the category has a {{verylargestub}} template on it. These are added manually, as here. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I realize 60 is the minimum for creation, and 50 is a guideline for deletion. My question was regarding that minimum, how it was decided, and whether there can be an exception as way to make large categories more easily navigable. Cheers. Encycloshave (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)