Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive/May 2008

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of discussions from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals for the month of May 2008. Please move completed May discussions to this page as they are closed, add discussion headers to each proposal showing the result, and leave incomplete discussions on the Proposals page. After May, the remainder of the discussions will be moved to this page, whether stub types have been created or not.

Those who create a stub template/cat should be responsible for moving the discussion here and listing the stub type in the archive summary.

Stub proposers please note: Items tagged as "nocreate" or "no consensus" are welcome for re-proposal if and when circumstances are auspicious.

Netball biography stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Due to a recent proliferation of articles on ANZ Championship players, there may now be enough articles in ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Netball biography stubs to warrant two subcategories (with templates):

Despite the rapid creation of a lot of short stubs, I think these articles still meet notability requirements under WP:ATHLETE, particularly since almost all of these articles relate to players in the ANZ Championship. These two subcategories will leave only about ten or so articles in the current stub category, which I hope isn't a problem. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 04:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Support - and yes, they definitely meet notability requirements. The main reason for this upswing in article numbers is the creation of the new WikiProject Netball. Grutness...wha? 07:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Support. Near-emptying the parent isn't a problem here, since it'd be a perfectly logical "container" for its subtypes, even if it had no articles at all. Alai (talk) 12:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:New Zealand politics stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
As Kathleen.wright5 points out, {{NewZealand-poli-stub}} now links to 60 articles; 40 more under ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:New Zealand stubs would qualify as well. I suggest we speedy create the category. Her Pegship (tis herself) 21:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

And the rest... I just added 90 to it from the main NZ stub category. Grutness...wha? 00:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Bengali language films

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was keep.
{{Bengali-film-stub}}

1. The stub does not exist already.

2.There are a large number of articles (more than 30) that need this stub category. Many of such articles are at present categorised under Category:Indian film stubs.

3. Category:Indian film stubs already has several similar sub-stub categories, such as Category:Hindi-language film stubs, Category:Kannada-language film stubs, Category:Telugu-language film stubs etc.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

4.Upmerging not needed. This category now has 70 stubs. Kathleen.wright5 13:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Outdoor pursuits

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was do not create.
‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:outdoor-pursuits-stubs I am trying to find a suitable stub category for the Tinderbox article - it seems like it might be of interest to those involved in outdoor pursuits such as camping, but I can't find a stub category like this. Nor can I find anything suitable for firemaking articles, or anything appropriate under science (e.g. combustion reactions), sports, leisure (e.g. camping) or history (e.g. making fire with flint). The best I could find was explosives, but that doesn't really seem right. If anyone can suggest something then I would be very grateful, but I wonder whether this stub category might be worth considering. Leevclarke (talk) 23:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

  • I'm not really convinced on the proposal, since "outdoor pursuits" covers such a wide subject matter it may not be really useful. As to Tinderbox, I've given it {{tool-stub}} for now, though that's probably not a brilliant description of it. Anyone else suggest a better stubtype for it? Grutness...wha? 02:19, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Burmese-geo subdivisions

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
I've already created ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Kachin State geography stubs; ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Ayeyarwady Division geography stubs and ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Mandalay Division geography stubs are now viable too, on the basis of usages of the upmerged templates, which I only recently actually got around to creating. (Parent was lately oversized, though is currently back down below 800.) Alai (talk) 06:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Support any over 60.Waacstats (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Fixed cats names from erroneous "Districts", to correct "Divisions". My bad. Alai (talk) 22:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{child-fantasy-novel-stub}} / ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Children's fantasy novel stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Children's novel stubs is over 600 strong; this sub-cat would siphon off at least 88 items. I think upmerged templates {{child-sf-novel-stub}} and {{child-hist-novel-stub}} might be useful as well, although neither has yet hit 60. Her Pegship (tis herself) 03:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Support for all of the above. Waacstats (talk) 20:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Australia-radio-bio-stub}}

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
There are at least 36 articles in Category:Radio people stubs for Australian radio presenters so I propose this template to be upmerged to both Category:Radio people stubs and Category:Australian people stubs. - Dravecky (talk) 08:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Michoacán geography stubs

After creating 32 Mexican geo-stub templates per the to-do list then an exciting few days restubbing most of the 850ish articles, I've found that 71 articles use {{Michoacán-geo-stub}} so I'm proposing this new category to go under ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Mexico geography stubs. Also, we should keep an eye on both {{Tamaulipas-geo-stub}} (currently at 50) and {{Veracruz-geo-stub}} (currently at 53). - Dravecky (talk) 08:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

fits the pattern of Speedy Waacstats (talk) 08:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Asian business biography stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
As with the journos below so to with the Business bios. Speedy. Waacstats (talk) 12:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Asian journalist stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Template was on to do list from May 06 but not category. Template has over 60 articles so do we speedy. Waacstats (talk) 10:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes we do, and the above one as well. Alai (talk) 13:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

More Album splits

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create upmerged templates.
Missing from Alai's efforts below is ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:1990s heavy metal album stubs which reached oversized today. I suggest

I have no figures for these but both feel viable having sorted the parent cats. So templates first, categories if they reach 60. Waacstats (talk) 10:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Seoul-geo-stub}}

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
The Seoul-related-geographical stubs are currently sorted under {{SouthKorea-geo-stub}}, which has more than 500 stubs, so it is hard to manage the large number of the stubs and to sort out Seoul only from the big category. The Seoul geographical articles are estimated over 300 (mostly "dong" or neighborhoods stubs). --Appletrees (talk) 12:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

  • 500's not huge by stub-sorting standards (we usually split at 800), but this one is worth considering at least. Given that there are 16 Administrative divisions of South Korea (which is how we'd normally split a geo-stub up), one of which is Seoul, a {{Seoul-geo-stub}} does sound reasonable. It may actually be worth having all 16 templates, and upmerging all those that don't reach 60 stubs. (Take that as a support) Grutness...wha? 00:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
    • To make things easier, I say almost of all articles with "-dong" and "-gu" suffix in Category:Gu of Seoul which also has 25 subcategories are stubs pertaining {{Seoul-geo-stub}}
Examples: Category:Dong of Jung-gu, Seoul, Category:Dong of Jung-gu, Seoul--Appletrees (talk) 01:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{CzechRepublic-castle-stub}}

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
A bit of retroactive proposing here, as while working through the to-do list I found that {{Czech-castle-stub}} had been awaiting creating since January 2008 and that all of the other Czech Republic stubs included "Republic" as above. So I boldly created {{CzechRepublic-castle-stub}} and restubbed the 28 or so that I could find. (There should be a few more, per the original nomination, but they weren't tagged with {{CzechRepublic-struct-stub}} so they were not readily apparent.) I mention this here so when {{CzechRepublic-castle-stub}} is "discovered" that it shows up as having been proposed even though the original approved proposal was for {{Czech-castle-stub}}. - Dravecky (talk) 10:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Yup, it should indeed have been with the Republic part of the name added. ISTR there were various shifts of templates and categories due to the whole "Czech Republic/Czechia" kerfuffle a year or two back, so that probably confused the issue a little. Grutness...wha? 11:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:2000s black metal album stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
The ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:2000s metal album stubs are oversized (sensing a pattern here?), and ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:2000s black metal album stubs would have 61 articles, by my categorywise count. Alai (talk) 00:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Korean-sports-stub}}

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create as revised.
{{Korea-footyclub-stub}} can't cover the whole Korea-sports-related stubs, so I propose the stub template be made. --Appletrees (talk) 12:57, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{France-road-stub}} / ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:France road stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Per this discussion, may we create this type to replace {{Streets of Paris-stub}}, which is not formatted according to current guidelines and which needs to be upmerged as undersized. Thanks. Her Pegship (tis herself) 18:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Definitely a template (speediably, in fact), and the usual "when there are 60" for the category - not that that should be much of a problem in this case. Grutness...wha? 00:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Syriac-people-stub}}

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was do not create.
131 articles in category Syriac people. At least 60 articles related to syriac people will fit that tag. AramaeanSyriac (talk) 23:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Indonesia-airport-stub}}/‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Indonesian airport stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
I propose the creation of the above stub - Speedy creation - S1. More than 60 articles in an upmerged template. The above has 61. There are also categories for India, Pakistan, PRC China, Russia and Turkey. Kathleen.wright5 09:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Template, what template? Seems speediable anyway, though. Alai (talk) 14:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Near-Earth asteroid stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
I realize this is somewhat laughable given the size of the ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:asteroid stubs problem, but I think the above additional subtype should be just about viable, based partly on categorisation, and partly on aphelion and perihelion data. A large chunk of could also be moved into the existing ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Main Belt asteroid stubs on similar bases, but that's also significantly oversized, and would eventually end up almost as large.

The root difficulty is that these were created without any useful categories, not bothering to use the already-available more specific stub types, and missing key data from their infoboxes that we'd normally hope to use to re-sort them. Indeed, they do nothing to assert notability at all, and their own "reference" is a db query to an online catalogue. Such discussion as there was about whether mass-creating these at all seems to have been inclusive, at best. So, my favoured option would be to delete or merge these, and string the creating bot-op and task requester up by their thumbs. Failing that, we may have to go with some "lumping" solution based on what little data we have available, such as the orbital parameters. Alai (talk) 00:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

'80s rock album subtypes

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.

Parent is oversized, unsurprisingly enough. Alai (talk) 18:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hard rock would probably be of use on the oversized 1990s and 2000s as well (already have alt-rock and a proposed pop-rock for these decades. Waacstats (talk) 10:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Literary award stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Looking at this list, there seems to be quite a few stub-sized literary award articles categorized either as ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category: award stubs or with no stub category at all. Perhaps it would be useful to create a literary award stub type? (Maybe as a subcategory of ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category: award stubs?) Ark'ay the Mortals' God (talk) 22:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:1990s thrash metal album stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
There are >60 articles that use both {{1990s-metal-album-stub}} and {{thrash-metal-album-stub}}, so I propose above category and {{1990s-thrash-metal-album-stub}}. Also as next category I attack will be the 2000s metal albums also propose {{2000s-thrash-metal-album-stub}}. Waacstats (talk) 07:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Strongly support both, at any desired speed. Alai (talk) 11:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Support SeveroTC 11:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Support with the spelling change I made to the proposed category (thrash instead of thrah [sic]). Caerwine Caer’s whines 21:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
1 proposer and 2 supports and it takes a forth person to spot the typo!, any way the {{2000s-thrash-metal-album-stub}} template has reached 54 working from Z back to P so I will create a matching category unless anyone has any complaints. Waacstats (talk) 08:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Norway-rail-stub}}/‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Norwegian rail stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Propose to create stub for rail transport in Norway based on S2. There are currently 231 articles in Europe rail stubs concerning Norway. Also, France, Germany, Luxembourg, United Kingdom, Poland, India, Japan, Malaysia, Korea, Mexico, United Stats and Canada have such nation-level stubs. Arsenikk (talk) 11:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Philippines-sport-bio-stub}} / ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Filipino sportspeople stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Haven't done an official count, but {{Philippines-basketball-bio-stub}} counts 55 while no other sportspeople template exists as of yet. Propose appropriate templates where needed.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 18:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

No complaints here (Someone may want to check on Malaysia as well) 84.68.164.188 (talk) 21:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Two NRHP speedies

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.

The NE category is oversized, these two are immediately viable, and can now be un-upmerged. Alai (talk) 21:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

You beat me to it. Speedy Waacstats (talk) 21:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I was a little boggled at the size of the new RI type. Not far off needing split itself! Alai (talk) 13:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The lists of NRHP in Rhode Island are all blue links so I assume we have them all and that there should be little future growth. Waacstats (talk) 13:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Good spot. Our work there is done, then, assuming people are expanding the articles to non-stubs roughly as fast as they're making new ones! Alai (talk) 14:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Cycling biography stubs split

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Following can at last be upmerged:

SeveroTC 23:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I think we can speedy upmerged templates for any country you deem worth the effort of the act of creating same, regardless of counts. We might want to consider a ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:European cycling biography stubs, sooner or later. (It'll be viable, the only question is, how much so will what's left be?) Alai (talk) 23:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
I was thinking of continental level categories. The European category would still be large but it would take out a nice number of non-Europeans:
  • Oceania = a category of c.66 including the upmerged Australia- template (47)
  • South America = a category of c.80 including the upmerged Colombia- template (30)
  • North America = a category of c.35 including a US- subcat
  • Asia = c.40
  • Africa = c.20
SeveroTC 00:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Almost perfect: we'd have four new viable subcats, and a very reasonably-sized remainder parent. Only the NA one is at all marginal, but let's go for it anyway. Support all. Alai (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Speedy

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
{{Azerbaijan-footy-bio-stub}} has 62 articles propose ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Azerbaijani football biography stubs. Waacstats (talk) 13:24, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Afghanistan geography stubs, by state, and related bot request

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Let me draw your attention to Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/FritzpollBot, which in the first instance is going (it is proposed) to create a whole load of Afghan-geos, and thereafter much else besides. So I suggest that we, in the short term and the specific instance, create upmerged templates on a per-state basis, and in the longer term and in general, keep in front of the bot's progress as it tackles each country . (The bot-op seems to be willing to help keep us in the loop on this, but might not be too thrilled if he'd end up waiting for a week for each run.) Alai (talk) 23:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy approval per bot approval discussion and to foster cooperation between stubbers & botters. Her Pegship (tis herself) 00:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Support - almost speedy - we should check there aren't any naming problems with Afghan provinces first, to get the template names as good as possible before the off. Grutness...wha? 00:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Looking at ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Provinces of Afghanistan shows that these names are likely to be all OK (with Sar-e pol the only problem name - SarePol-geo-stub?). BUT - Afghanistan has 34 provinces and there are 38 categories! Clearly redirects are going to be needed for Bamyan/Bamian/Bamiyan, Nuristan/Nurestan, and Orūzgān/Uruzgan. Some CfD work is also needed. Grutness...wha? 01:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Template list: I made a list of templates. I checked them against the actual articles to use the current article name. For Oruzgan, I removed the special characters and used SarePol for Sar-e Pol.
  1. {{Badakhshan-geo-stub}}
  2. {{Badghis-geo-stub}}
  3. {{Baghlan-geo-stub}}
  4. {{Balkh-geo-stub}}
  5. {{Bamyan-geo-stub}}
  6. {{Daykundi-geo-stub}}
  7. {{Farah-geo-stub}}
  8. {{Faryab-geo-stub}}
  9. {{Ghazni-geo-stub}}
  10. {{Ghor-geo-stub}}
  11. {{Helmand-geo-stub}}
  12. {{Herat-geo-stub}}
  13. {{Jowzjan-geo-stub}}
  14. {{Kabul-geo-stub}}
  15. {{Kandahar-geo-stub}}
  16. {{Kapisa-geo-stub}}
  17. {{Khost-geo-stub}}
  18. {{Kunar-geo-stub}}
  19. {{Kunduz-geo-stub}}
  20. {{Laghman-geo-stub}}
  21. {{Lowgar-geo-stub}}
  22. {{Nangarhar-geo-stub}}
  23. {{Nimruz-geo-stub}}
  24. {{Nuristan-geo-stub}}
  25. {{Oruzgan-geo-stub}}
  26. {{Paktia-geo-stub}}
  27. {{Paktika-geo-stub}}
  28. {{Panjshir-geo-stub}}
  29. {{Parwan-geo-stub}}
  30. {{Samangan-geo-stub}}
  31. {{SarePol-geo-stub}}
  32. {{Takhar-geo-stub}}
  33. {{Wardak-geo-stub}}
  34. {{Zabul-geo-stub}}
Let me know if this is okay to create these. I can create them with the up-merged category. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 02:11, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I might have gone with {{Orūzgān-geo-stub}} with redirects from the other two, just to more closely follow the articlespace, but close enough for government work, given that the article lists all three. I certainly support speedy creation of all the above. Alai (talk) 03:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd support speedy creation of these, too - we can always worry about possible redirects from alternative names later. Grutness...wha? 03:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I have created the templates. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 02:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.

European school stubs by nation

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:European school stubs is a oversized (325 articles at present), suggest splitting to national level (eg. {{Norway-school-stub}} which has over 30 candidates), and upmerging where appropriate. (possibly speediable under S2) -- Ratarsed (talk) 11:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Please don't say 325 articles is oversized: have you seen the size of the backlog of stub types that are over 800?  :) I certainly support speedying any national upmerged templates you fancy whatsoever. Bear in mind that the threshold for separate "un-upmerged" categories is 60, however. Alai (talk) 13:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I can't say I've come across many stub cats over 200 articles, to be honest; mind you, my main interest is in the categorisation of school cats. I was aware at the 60 articles to make it's own category, and would obviously respect that (the figure for Norway was from stub sense for those marked as both {{Norway-stub}} and {{Euro-school-stub}}; I thought there were more than that though, from my stub-sorting in ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:School stubs and children. Which reminds me, Is there a precedent for dealing with stubs in Oceania and the Caribbean? It seems that whilst the major countries are represented, it might be worth doing "something" to move them into Continental categories maybe? -- Ratarsed (talk) 15:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Stroll on over to WP:WSS/T and be appalled, then. :) The schools have been oversized (as in over 800) in the past, but are clearly being wrassled under control these days. Just checking about the 60, given your mention in passing of 30, pardon my over-zealousness. We've certainly had categories for both Oceania and the Caribbean in the past (and have them at present), so no reason that couldn't be looked at here, too. Per-country upmerged templates preferred, however. Alai (talk) 21:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Remaining Californian counties: region?

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
I recently noticed that we were missing a handful of the Californian counties, in the scheme we have to upmerge them to somewhat ad hoc regions. I came across this for Lassen, which for the moment I've just created upmerged to the parent. Looks like the whole NEern 'corner' is missing, though. Anyone have any bright ideas? Alai (talk) 14:06, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

support creating any missing county templates as for what to do with them?? Waacstats (talk) 21:01, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The Shasta Cascade article lists several counties as part of that region, including Lassen. HTH, Her Pegship (tis herself) 21:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Created ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Shasta Cascade geography stubs, three more templates, and repointed an additional four existing one to this more specific category. Alai (talk) 21:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Thai museum stubs

Or "Thailand museum stubs", or "Museum in Thailand stubs", however we're mangling these this week. Viable at 80, parent is oversized. Alai (talk) 02:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Given that the Building and structure category would use Thai, I Support ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Thai museum stubs and a rename of the Australian category is probably in order. Waacstats (talk) 10:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Russian business biography stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Not quite guaranteed to be viable at a category-base count of 59, but I'm sure there's another oligarch lurking around someplace. Parent is current oversized, though I'm sure resorting, especially to the writers, politicians and scientists, would take care of that. Alai (talk) 02:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Support There are bound to be a couple hiding in business-bio cats. Waacstats (talk) 10:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Split of "scientific" journals

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Firstly, notice that this has been rescoped to include all academic journals, which would be sensible enough, except that the old template and category are still in use for such, rather confusingly. In the medium-term this will require a rename, but since we probably want to keep the science type in use as such, I suggest as a first step that we create an ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:academic journal stubs, and migrate as much of the content as possible to fresh subtypes or upmerged templates, so as to reduce the amount of double-handling we'll end up doing in the eventual rename. On which note, here's some by-permcat numbers:

No guarantees we don't have some overlap. Alai (talk) 02:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Having traipsed backwards and forwards between different sections of a university library while doing my Psych MSc, I can virtually guarantee it :) Grutness...wha? 02:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
sounds like a good plan and hopefully not too much overlap. Waacstats (talk) 10:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Split of ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:European sports venue stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Following can be upmerged:

SeveroTC 21:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Support. and I think any other country people want to do should be ok. Waacstats (talk) 09:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. These won't take care of the excess in the short term, though. However, I believe a ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:European ice hockey venue stubs would be viable, and would do so. Alai (talk) 12:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, articles matching ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Ice hockey venue stubs and a) ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:European sports venue stubs = 60; b) recursive ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:European sports venue stubs = 114. SeveroTC 15:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Only problem there is that a number of the ice hockey venue articles are marked with a nation-sports-venue-stub which will still point to the euro cat. Waacstats (talk) 18:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
I imagined that might be the case, but the solution would be double-stubbing. In fact, I think a large number are already double-stubbed -- I'm speaking from vague memory here, don't hold me to it. (I think I crunched the numbers off last month's db dump, and I'm currently building the db for this month.) Though it may be that it doesn't actually resolve the "excess" issue, for that reason. Alai (talk) 20:37, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.

{{Sufism-stub}} or such like

(moved from talk page) I wanted to create a new stub template for sufism stubs. As I was unaware of the red tape involved I just went ahead and made a category Sufism stubs. It easily has hundereds of articles within its scope and is a much needed template for the development of Sufism related topics and the Sufism portal. The only consensus that was built on this template was on the Sufism talk page. Anyway, what is the appropriate way forward. Thanks--Shahab (talk) 15:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was do not create.

Ballad stubs

Category:Ballads has been subdivided at an exponential rate. On top of that music genre song categories have been subdivided for ballad profiling as well. So many genres have profiled ballads, that it lead to the creation of the subcategory Category:Ballads by genre. So many ballads have been profiled, that we need to make the template {{stub-ballad}}

Sample:

This ballad-related article is a stub.

--Roadstaa (talk) 22:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Actually, I think it would be {{ballad-stub}} or {{ballad-song-stub}}...if it flies. It looks like we have previously subdivided by music genre and then by "song" (see ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Song stubs). Since ballads can belong to many genres, I think we should stick with the current song-stub sub-cats. Her Pegship (tis herself) 23:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
  • It would definitely be {{Ballad-stub}} or {{Ballad-song-stub}} - not {{Stub-ballad}} - but to be honest I'm not keen. The term Ballad has various slippery and vague definitions, even in music alone (ballads are primarily poems that tell stories). In music there are at least three different definitions of the term (one for rock, one for folk, and one for jazz). As such, any stub division into ballads and non-ballads is going to be problematical. Grutness...wha? 02:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I understand my template nomenclature mistake. Also, ballads make up almost 50% of popular music. Thats one criterion that warrants a ballad stub category and template. --Roadstaa (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
      • That is exactly the problem. We already have a bunch of popular music stub types split up per genre and decade, but not musical form (you only find that in the classical music stubs). We don't split by the theme of the piece either, i.e. (in the case of ballads), songs that tell a story. We need to stick close to the current structure or we might as well give up on any structure. Her Pegship (tis herself) 21:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Ironically, the fact that such a high proportion of songs are ballads might actually mitigate against there being a stub type. Such a broad split might not be much use in the long run, since it would instantly result in the need for extra splits. 50% of song stubs? That'd make a big category... Grutness...wha? 00:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Split of Togo-geo-stub

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
A strange situation has come up with trying to split {{Togo-geo-stub}}. It seems that editors have gone on a mass-stub creating binge, but only for a few prectures in the Kara Region. Propose creating stub templates for all regions, and templates and categories for ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Assoli Prefecture, ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Bassar Prefecture, and ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Doufelgou Prefecture.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 21:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I support the by prefecture split, however the regions are the first level division so could we upmerge the relevent templates to regional categories. Waacstats (talk) 07:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The 3 prefectures I linked to above all have above 60 stubs (one of them has nearly 200), so it seems less helpful to just dump 300+ stubs into one bigger category when we can split them more effectively.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 11:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
sorry. I meant upmerging the other prefecture templates to regional categories. Waacstats (talk) 18:54, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:2000s hip hop single stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
2000s singles are oversized again, this would help somewhat, at 74. Lemme hear y'say "speediable on pattern of parent types!" Alai (talk) 18:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

As you say Speedy Waacstats (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Sorbeoconcha stubs subtypes, by family

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create as revised.

These are currently split between the above-mentioned parent, and the long-deprecated ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Mesogastropoda stubs type, which has been awaiting followup action for months and months. This would reduce the size of the problem, and hopefully stimulate a final resolution thereof, if someone would care to run the rule over each of the other families, and determine if they're still viable entities in the latest taxonomy. (BTW, this is on-going fallout from a run of Polbot, which was using data from several taxonomies ago.) Alai (talk) 23:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

That's just counting from the residual mesos. Alai (talk) 20:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category: North East England building and structure stubs (speedy)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
I think this qualifies for S1 speedy creation. I believe there are more than 60 articles tagged with Template:Durham-struct-stub, Template:Northumberland-struct-stub, or Template:TyneandWear-struct-stub, and those should all go into a North East England building and structure stubs category. I suppose Template:NorthYorkshire-struct-stub could also be added, though that's already in Category:Yorkshire building and structure stubs. Klausness (talk) 12:26, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

No, North Yorks would have to be split up into constituent UAs, as I mentioned earlier. Ceremonial counties don't "nest" into the regions perfectly, so their use isn't really ideal, but it does save some extra templates in most instances. Come to that, the latter should be rescoped as ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Yorkshire and the Humber building and structure stubs, with two additional upmerged Lincolnshire UA templates, if we want all the pieces of the jigsaw to fit together properly. Alai (talk) 17:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Support the regional category, and slap UK government around the head for not subdividing its regions properly. Grutness...wha? 00:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Do bear in mind that ceremonial counties are, well, ceremonial. The UAs, metropolitan counties and shire counties (if I have my Anatidae entirely row-wise) are the more meaningful divisions, in practical terms. Alai (talk) 14:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.


The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create North East England building and structure stubs category.

Missing categories for some existing stub templates

Some templates in Category:United Kingdom building and structure stubs don't seem to have their own categories. Before I go ahead and create those, I thought I should check here (even though I wouldn't really be creating new stubs, just the missing categories). The templates are Template:Durham-struct-stub, Template:NorthernIreland-struct-stub, Template:Northumberland-struct-stub, and Template:TyneandWear-struct-stub. Klausness (talk) 18:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Greetings! That's because until a stub template is used on 60 or more articles, it doesn't get its own category, per stub creation guidelines. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself) 18:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Ah, OK.... Well, never mind then.... Klausness (talk) 21:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Wait, I do have a followup, though. What would be the process for creating, say, a North East England building and structure stubs category (which would presumably include Durham, Northumberland, and Tyne and Wear)? Would this need to be proposed once there are enough articles to go into it? For example, Category:East Midlands building and structure stubs doesn't have its own template, so presumably all its members are there via one of the more specific templates in the category. Klausness (talk) 21:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
That would be this very process. :) It looks to me like it's there or thereabouts, and it's indeed exactly on the pattern of existing split, so I'd certainly support it as soon as there's 60. (Some stray bits of North Yorks should also be included, which will probably require some additional templates at the UA level.) Alai (talk) 23:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Klausness, you might also like to check out our Speedy creation criteria at the top of the page - S1 describes exactly the sort of situation you were initially talking about. As far as the regional splits are concerned, as long as they are along official regional lines (as shown here), I see no problem with it, other than the usual one that some counties straddle region lines. Grutness...wha? 01:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I tagged a few more releveant stub articles, and I think there should definitely be more than 60 now. Klausness (talk) 12:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Split of {{Diplomat-stub}}

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create by country of origin.
‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Diplomat stubs is around 600 and heavily undersorted, as most diplomats are only sorted into the politician stub. Templates for every continent, categories when they reach 60+--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 00:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Support and comment - There are definitely well over 60 from Europe. Catscan suggests that 201 of them could simply use {{US-diplomat-stub}}, if such were also created, so I'd suggest creating that as well. An upmerged UK template (39 stubs) may also be useful. Grutness...wha? 01:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd prefer we started with the "obvious" countries, and upmerged those to continents in the first instance, as and when. If it would seriously inconvenience to go without the continental templates, though, I can just about wear those, too. Alai (talk) 01:29, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
This will sound daft but can I confirm that a British ambassador to the United States would be given a UK template only, i.e not a US template. Waacstats (talk) 10:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Diplomats should be sorted by country of origin, not country od service, like any soccer player or politician.--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 15:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
That's what I expected but I have seen the odd diplomat say for a US diplomat in Brazil given a US-bio-stub, diplomat-stub and brazil-bio-stub. Just wanted to check everyone here was working the same way. Waacstats (talk) 07:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
It sounds like a good working principle to me, but Wiki Rule Number One is kinda that there's no accounting for "everyone". Alai (talk) 14:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{ChannelIslands-bio-stub}}/‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Channel Islands people stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create umbrella tpl & cat + upmerged island tpls.
Though nowhere near urgent, I note that close to 80 of the 150-odd ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Channel Islands stubs are bio-stubs. Might be worth having at least a separate template, and ideally a separate category as well. Grutness...wha? 01:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Question? Are we going to split the Channel Islands like we do a country (eg ChannelIslands-bio-stub, ChannelIslands-geo-stub) or split it first into its component parts (eg jersey-stub, guernsey-stub). Note that there are seperate wikiprojects for both Jersey and Guernsey (inactive since Jan and only 1 person is a member (the same person, creater of both) but they do exist). Waacstats (talk) 09:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
What's happened with the geo-stubs is that there is a ChannelIslands-geo-stub with two redirects to it (Jersey-geo-stub and Guernsey-geo-stub). It might be worth doing the same with the bio-stub (if it is made). As far as the generic ChannelIslands-stub, I thin quite a few of the articles deal with both of the bailiwicks, so there's not the clear split there is with either the people or the places, though similar redirects might be worthwhile there too. Given that the same person seems to be the entirety of both wikiprojects I doubt there'll be any clamouring for separate stub types until they get big enough to be noticed by WP:WSS, and if it's anything like the geo-stub they will be heavily weighted towards Jersey anyway. Grutness...wha? 12:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Either axis of split sounds feasible to me, so I'd be happy to defer to the one-man band(s). Possibly a slight preference for the "by type" split, since we've already gone that way with the geos. Alai (talk) 13:45, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm happy with either axis split, the idea of having by type with upmerged jersey-, guernsey- templates is probably the best. Waacstats (talk) 14:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd have a slight preference for distinct, upmerged templates (if we go with that axis of split), since it'd avoid the need to have two distinct images in each (currently horribly oversized when taken together, and would be a little indistinct if resized to 20x15 or so). Alai (talk) 15:53, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Good point. From that, two separate templates both feeding into the one category may make more sense that one with two redirects, since it's unlikely there are many bios relating to both (though there are some Norman counts... they may do). Grutness...wha? 23:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
We may wish to keep the "canonical" template as well, for the sake of back-compatibility. Though I have a strong urge to shrink the image sizes, and will likely do so once most are replaced by the more specific ones. (Unless someone wants to get fancy and impale or divide them per bend into a single image...) Alai (talk) 23:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

{{Korean-culture-stub}}

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create upmerged Korea-art-stub for now.
Korean culture related articles are just categorized under {{Korea-stub}}, so I think this template would be good for sorting out among 580 stubs.--Appletrees (talk) 13:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Northern Ireland geeography stubs split

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create all including redirect.
The recently discovered {{fermanagh-geo-stub}} makes me think that the time might be right for separate upmerged templates for each of Northern Ireland's six counties. Given that there are closing in on 500 stubs, it's not urgent, but it's also likely that most if not all of them would reach the 60 stub level. I'd like to propose:

with separate categories for any reaching 60 stubs (of the form "County Foo geography stubs").

It's plausible that the Londonderry one may have to both be protected and have a (similarly protected) redirect from {{Derry-geo-stub}}, too. Grutness...wha? 10:08, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Support no feeling wither way regarding redirect. Waacstats (talk) 12:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Hopefully if we create both the template and redirect, people will take the hint and leave well-enough alone. But maybe I'm clinging to too much residual optimism... Alai (talk) 13:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Or more likely war over which template is the main one and which the redirect but that could just be my natural pessimism coming through. Waacstats (talk) 21:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Comment - WP standard is to use Co.Londonderry (compromising by using Derry for the city name), though perhaps wording the template's text to read "County (London)derry" would survive without too much mauling. Grutness...wha? 01:08, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Australian radio biography stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Only thing that seems to be even nearly viable out of the oversized Aus bios, at 57. Alai (talk) 02:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Support if there are 57ish, template currently only has 37 articles though. Waacstats (talk) 10:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I hadn't realized there was an upmerged template. I shall report back after I've populated it somewhat further. Alai (talk) 13:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

'00s indie album subtypes

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Doesn't seem more than the other day when we were splitting these off from the "rock" type, but they're not considerably oversized in their own right. The following look to be viable:

Indie pop looks fairly straightforward; the Canadian type raises the issue of whether re-splitting by country is something we want to start doing; the last two might be "sideways" moves, rather than strictly subtypes. Alai (talk) 00:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Support all the album splits proposed along with these, with the exception of Canadian indie rock (unless it is a recognised sub genre and not just indie albums from Canada). As some one who cleared a load out of the respective parents I feel I better get my shovel out on these. Waacstats (talk) 07:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

'00s hip hop album subtypes

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create as proposed.

Oversized parent. Not sure how useful these are likely to be, but they seem at least fairly clear-cut. Might not to do all three at once, given overlap issues. Alai (talk) 18:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I think a ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:2000s rap album stubs would be of more use. (I assume -eastcoast-, -westcoast and -gangstarap- would be used for templates. Waacstats (talk) 10:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
We don't have a separate ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:rap albums -- or to be precise, it's a mostly-empty category redirect -- I assume on the theory that for genre purposes "rap" and "hip hop" are synonymous. If there's a viable distinction to be had, feel free. Alai (talk) 12:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Good point scrub that idea Waacstats (talk) 21:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand, because there does seem to me to be at least a connotational difference, and several of the narrower subcats use the term "rap", while others go with "hip hop". But I'd at least check with the musos, and look into creating a corresponding permcat, first... Alai (talk) 00:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

'00s electronic album subtypes

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.

Or at least, possible, alleged "sub" types, given the twisty maze of genre categories. At any rate, of the (oversized) population of ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:2000s electronic album stubs, these are counts by genre cats. Also caveats about overlaps between each of these. Alai (talk) 18:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Mid and Outer Solar System asteroid stubs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
OK, grab-bag warning. In an increasingly desparate attempt to chip some icecubes off the asteroid-stub-berg, it looks like this will fly (but leaves a massive MB remainder I'm at a loss with). Upmerged templates for significant sub-types such as the Jupiter Trojans, who are probably the majority of these, are probably a good idea. Alai (talk) 14:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

Christian orgs, possible splits

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed creation of the stub template and/or category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was create.
Yes, oversized. Seems to be huge numbers of radio stations. Here's some possible splits:

Off the top of my head, I think I'd do with just the first two for now, as they seem the most clear-cut in scope. Alai (talk) 02:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Support as parent is oversized. Not too happy about splitting radio stations by genre but I suppose as this is a split of Christian orgs we can argue against further by genre splits based on that fact. Waacstats (talk) 11:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
They may also be tagged as radio station stubs (geographically sorted or otherwise) -- I haven't checked in detail. So this split of the org tag would not, in the first instance, affect any existing radio station tags, and I would of course urge that for future use they be double-stubbed with both such. Alai (talk) 12:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/Archive/May_2008&oldid=1038412896"