Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject Stub sorting
Project page talk
- Stub types (sections) talk
- Stub types (full list) talk
- To do talk
- Naming conventions talk
- Redirects category talk
Wikipedia:Stub talk
Proposals (A) talk
- Current month
Discussion talk
Criteria (A) (discontinued) talk
Deletion (Log) (discontinued) talk

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, February 2024[edit]

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


Coleophora stubs[edit]

I'm unsure if this would actually work as a stub template, since it's a strange case - Category:Coleophoridae stubs is one of the biggest stub categories, but 1374/1409 of the articles are Coleophora, with only 35 non-Coleophora in the category. I'm sure if I knew more about moths I could propose more specific stub categories, but as it is I wonder if having a subcategory for Coleophora would at least help a tiny bit. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 22:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tetrapodomorph stubs[edit]

I would like to make a stub category for early tetrapodomorphs (animals closer to modern limbed vertebrates than to other modern animals). Tetrapodomorpha contains many taxa that don't fit neatly into the traditional "fish"/"amphibian" dichotomy. This template lists most of the articles about the group, most of which are stubs. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 00:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cynodont stubs[edit]

Category:Prehistoric therapsid stubs is pretty big at over 200 pages, so I'd like to make a subcategory for the cynodonts, which make up a significant portion of the current therapsid stubs. Also, we already have Category:Anomodont stubs for another therapsid group. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 00:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sawfly stubs[edit]

Category:Indian passenger trains stubs[edit]

To categorise passenger train stub articles into a separate sub cat in Category:India rail transport stubs.

Existing sub cat Category:Indian express train stubs can be placed under this along with other non express train service articles.— Preceding unsigned comment added by nkb_21 (talkcontribs)

How many articles would qualify for such a sub-cat? Her Pegship (?) 23:20, 20 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
about 78 articles qualify and the Category:Indian express train stubs upmerges to it. Nkb 21 (talk) 04:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nitidulidae stub upmerging--propose own category[edit]

Category: National Trust stubs[edit]

I'm proposing Category:National Trust stubs to enable editors to navigate directly to articles relating to the National Trust that could benefit from improvement, as part of a paid editing pilot for the organisation. There's 94 results using Petscan (ID). You can read more about the pilot here.

Note:This is my first stub category nomination, so please bear with me as I work out what to do if the nomination is successful. Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 15:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to the stub house! I have several questions about this proposed stub type:
  • Does "National Trust" here mean the National Trust that involves England, Wales, and Northern Ireland (but not Scotland, which has its own)?
  • If this stub type is to be applied to properties and objects, the template and category should reflect that (i.e. "NationalTrust-England-stub, National Trust properties in England stubs").
  • Would this project benefit more from a stub type as proposed, or from a separate non-stub category such as those used by WikiProjects?
Not making any judgments, just curious. Her Pegship (?) 20:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks very much for the questions @Pegship this definitely helps me think what would be useful.
1) Yes, it's the England, Wales, Northern Ireland one
2) I'm very happy to take more experienced advice on this - I suggested "National Trust stubs" as a catch-all, but am happy to be guided by editors with more experience in this area
3) Currently there isn't a WikiProject National Trust. My thinking with the general stub type as proposed was that it would be a one-stop-shop that we could point new editors to as place where all the NT content that might benefit from expansion could be held. Again, happy to take advice on this, I am new to the work in this project
Thanks again Lajmmoore (talk) 09:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see that the items on the PetScan list are mainly locations or structures or art. Maybe a more general {{NationalTrust-property-stub}}, without the geography involved? Also, I assume that this template would be applied in addition to existing stub templates rather than replacing them; the articles already have templates like {{castle-stub}}, {{painting-stub}}, etc., which they should still keep. Her Pegship (?) 21:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, @Pegship you've got the words to express what I was thinking, but didn't quite know how to say. Thank you! Lajmmoore (talk) 14:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Proposals, January 2024[edit]

British Columbia Coast geography stubs[edit]

Re-creation of Norway geography stub categories[edit]

Stub category for Leiodidae stub, currently upmerging[edit]