Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Stub sorting
Puzzle stub cropped.png
Information
Project page talk
- Stub types (sections) talk
- Stub types (full list) talk
- To do talk
- Naming conventions talk
- Redirects category talk
Wikipedia:Stub talk
Discussion
Proposals (A) talk
- Current month
Discussion talk
Criteria (A) (discontinued) talk
Deletion (Log) (discontinued) talk
Category

On this WikiProject Stub sorting subpage, you can propose new stub types (please read the procedures beforehand!), as well as the reorganization and subdivision of existing stub types. You can also discuss anything else related to stubs on the talk page.

Proposing new stub types – procedure[edit]

Important: If you wish to propose the creation of a stub ARTICLE you've come to the wrong place. If you don't have a username yourself, please go to WP:AFC for proposing a new article. If you already have a username, you can create the article yourself. If you don't know how, add {{Helpme}} to your user talk page to request help from other editors. This page only deals with stub TEMPLATES and CATEGORIES; we cannot help you with creating articles.

Proposing new stub types
If you wish to propose a new stub category and template, please follow these procedures:
  1. Check the List of stub types or under Category:Stub categories to make sure that your proposed new stub does not already exist.
  2. List it at the top of the current month's section, under a header, like the ones shown (if any). Sign it with a datestamp (~~~~).
    • Please bear in mind that a stub category isn't about the importance or notability of the topic!
  3. Find a good number[1] of stub articles, as many as you can, that will fit that template. You may use this tool to scan through categories; tagged stubs are always in Category:All stub articles and transclude {{asbox}}. Each of these articles can be:
    • currently marked with {{stub}};
    • currently marked with another type of stub tag (in which case you should justify why your tag is better for the article than the current one);
    • a stub whose categorisation is highly ambiguous or questionable;
    • not marked as a stub.
  4. If you use any category scan (from the tool mentioned above or from any other), please link to it so that other users can confirm that the results are still accurate.
  5. Others may do the same, if they so desire.
  6. 5 days after listing it here, if there is general approval or no objection, go ahead and create the new category and/or template following the format on Wikipedia:Stub. List the new stub type on the stub types list in an appropriate section. If consensus is not clear, or discussion is still ongoing, the proposal will remain open until consensus can be reached.
  7. If you wish to propose a stub type which does not currently have 60 articles that could use it, you may propose an upmerged template in a similar way. An upmerged template would feed into currently existing stub categories until such time that there are enough stubs for a separate stub category. At that point a category for it may be separately proposed. Some times, it may be difficult to be sure how many stubs would get a tag - in which case you can also start with an upmerged stub tag until you're sure there are enough.

DO NOT place a proposal here for any stub type which has already been created and is being discussed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. The proposal page is only for stub types that have not yet been created, and it is better to keep any discussion of such stub types in one place rather than splitting it between different pages. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion is the correct page for proposals to delete a stub type.

^ . Good number means about 60 articles or more, or 30 or more if it is the primary stub type of a WikiProject, though this figure may vary from case to case.

"Speedy creation"[edit]

A stub type may be proposed for "speedy creation" if it meets one of the following criteria:

  • S1 - the creation of a category for which an approved upmerged template already exists and is now in use on more than 60 articles.
  • S2 - the creation of an upmerged national-level template for a subject in which other such national-level templates currently exist (e.g., X-bio-stub, X-hist-stub, or X-geo-stub, where X is the name of an internationally widely recognised country) or other instances where a clearly established pattern of similar subtypes exists. The proposed topic may not be controversial in scope. Many templates qualifying for S2 are listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/To do/To create.

List speedy creation proposals in the same proposal listings as normal stub proposals below.

Proposals, December 2019[edit]

Please check how many articles qualify for a stub type before proposing it.

NEW PROPOSALS[edit]

Proposals, November 2019[edit]

Speedy creation (S1): New Zealand Paralympic category[edit]

Create Canadian parliamentary group stubs[edit]

Rationale: Per discussion with administrator Bearcat, et al., elsewhere, we have a number of parliamentary groups/technical groups (chiefly in the Senate of Canada) that are notionally both (a) non-partisan and (b) non-election-contesting. As such, they're not strictly a political party, though they are a parliamentary caucus (or a parliamentary party). Thus, I propose creating the Canadian parliamentary group stubs stub sorting category and re-sorting the applicable non-political party caucuses into this category. Note, too, that in the House of Commons, we could/would re-sort Democratic Representative Caucus and Quebec debout (short-lived spinoff from the Bloc) into this new stub sorting category. Note, too, this would be in keeping with our existing naming conventions such that similar stub sorting categories could be added as needed for other countries. Doug Mehus T·C 16:50, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Presumably this would be a sub-cat of Category:Canada politics stubs, and the permcat would be Category:Parliamentary groups in Canada. Are there 60+ articles that would qualify for this stub type? Her Pegship (really?) 19:07, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Pegship, 60+? Probably not. If you include historical parliamentary groups, there's probably close to 30-40, but still short of the 60+ requirement. Still, being tagged as a "Canadian political party stub" is not correct.
Would you, alternatively, support an upmerging of the parliamentary groups in Canada to Category:Canada politics stubs? Doug Mehus T·C 19:12, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Pegship, Or, alternatively, a renaming of Category:Canadian political party stubs to Category:Canadian political party and parliamentary group stubs? Doug Mehus T·C 19:15, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Dmehus - If there aren't enough to meet the stub quantity guidelines, I'm all for upmerging them to Category:Canada politics stubs. Her Pegship (really?) 23:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Pegship, Thanks. I wasn't sure if individual pages were permitted at Category:Canadian politics stubs. Is that something I can do boldly, or do the stub sorting category changes require consensus? Doug Mehus T·C 23:12, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Dmehus - Not sure what you mean about individual pages... I'm guessing that the proposal ends up with {{Canada-parliamentary-group-stub}}, upmerged to Category:Canada politics stubs? Her Pegship (really?) 06:02, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Vermont gubernatorial election stubs[edit]

A search for the phrase "Vermont gubernatorial election" within the list of articles in Category:Vermont election stubs reveals that the phrase occurs 67 times, meaning that there are 67 stub articles about Vermont gubernatorial elections. Because the common threshold of articles necessary to merit the creation of a stub category is 60, this suggests that creating a subcategory of Category:Vermont election stubs specifically for stubs about Vermont gubernatorial elections could be in order. Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 21:28, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Split 'Australian rules biography, 1900s birth stubs' by year[edit]

Currently, Category:Australian rules biography, 1900s birth stubs has over 1000 articles in it. I propose that it be split by year of birth (1900-1909).

  1. 1900: 97 pages
  2. 1901: 98 pages
  3. 1902: 96 pages
  4. 1903: 99 pages
  5. 1904: 95 pages
  6. 1905: 110 pages
  7. 1906: 104 pages
  8. 1907: 103 pages
  9. 1908: 125 pages
  10. 1909: 123 pages

Given the scope of the pages to edit (all 1000+), I also propose that DannyS712 bot implement the sub-categorization if this proposal passes. In comments, please specify if you support the stub templates but not the bot edits. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 07:33, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Support split and bot request. Her Pegship (really?) 21:45, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Split 'Russian football defender, 1990s births stubs' by year[edit]

Currently, Category:Russian football defender, 1990s births stubs has over 1000 articles in it. I propose that it be split by year of birth (1990-1999).

  1. 1990: 105 pages
  2. 1991: 121 pages
  3. 1992: 129 pages
  4. 1993: 104 pages
  5. 1994: 109 pages
  6. 1995: 111 pages
  7. 1996: 126 pages
  8. 1997: 118 pages
  9. 1998: 112 pages
  10. 1999: 86 pages

Given the scope of the pages to edit (all 1000+), I also propose that DannyS712 bot implement the sub-categorization if this proposal passes. In comments, please specify if you support the stub templates but not the bot edits. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 07:44, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Support split and bot request. Her Pegship (really?) 21:45, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposals, October 2019[edit]

Regional religion stubs[edit]

West Bengal geography stubs[edit]

mobile-tech-stub[edit]

silent-film-stub[edit]