Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting

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

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

Interpreter stubs[edit]

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


| icon = [[File:Alien icon.svg | 35px]]
| subject   =  Extraterrestrial being-related 
| qualifier = 
| category  = Science fiction stubs
| tempsort  =  
| name      = Template:Alien-sf-stub

template:Alien-stub is wrong. It claims to be an "extrateressials" stub category, but it uses the Science fiction stubs category. Since extraterrestrials are not necessarily science fiction, this categorization is wrong, or the description is wrong. It even claims it is called {{Alien-sf-stub}} which isn't the name of the template (it is a different template) -- (talk) 13:41, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Wrong or not, it was created by Barbara (WVS) (talk · contribs) but I can't find where in the WP:WSS/P archives it was approved - or even proposed. It has just two transclusions, and so is eligible for deletion unless somebody can come up with 58 or so articles for which this template would be appropriate. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:37, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
I concur with Redrose64 🌹 (talk). Her Pegship (talk) 21:55, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

This stub template was deleted in 2014. It seems to have been revived in a confused form without any discussion earlier this year. The only article marked with it wasn't a stub, by the way, so it is currently unused and can presumably be speedied as the re-creation of a deleted template. Grutness...wha? 15:21, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposal for a Category:Wikipedia stub templates by topic[edit]

Hi there. I have been going through several categories devoted to stub templates, for instance: Category:Sciences stub templates, Category:Literature stub templates, Category:Academic journals stub templates, Category:Cuisine stub templates, etc. whick is OK in itself.

On the other hand there is the very big Category:Stub message templates.

But there is not yet an intermediate category, say, a Category:Wikipedia stub templates by topic (or maybe a Category:Wikipedia stub template categories). This would make easier the categorisation and search of stub templates in general.

What do you say? Regards, --Fadesga (talk) 11:30, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm not convinced about it, to be honest. While on the surface it sounds a good idea it may be more complicated than it initially seems. Those categories you mention are run by individual WikiProjects for their projects' use, and aren't really anything to do with WP:WSS. Creating a separate hierarchy of template categories will just get confused with those WP-specific categories (and WP:WSS is already too often accused of interfering with/getting in the way of subject-specific WikiProjects). We already have stub templates within the individual stub categories anyway, so if anyone is looking for specific template types, it's easy enough to check that way. Grutness...wha? 15:08, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Arkansas National Register of Historic Places - Help with Regions[edit]

(Edit: Please disregard this message, this was the result of a typo that I have fixed) Hi, I'm working on the June 2017 proposal to add more subcategories to Arkansas Registered Historic Place stubs, and I'm running into a problem. Because many of the counties don't merit their own stub category, I decided it made the most sense to implement region subcategories, and then add all the counties categories to their respective region. Ultimately, larger regions would get their own category within the region, while smaller categories would rollup directly to the region.

As a particular example, in Northwest Arkansas Registered Historic Place stubs, Benton County, Arkansas Registered Historic Place stubs, Sebastian County, Arkansas Registered Historic Place stubs, and Washington County, Arkansas Registered Historic Place stubs would all exist, and then the remaining counties would just be tags that rollup directly into the Northwest Arkansas NRHP stubs category.

The problem I have is that I'm not sure how to get the smaller counties to rollup directly to the region without their own category. I used {{asbox}} to try and create {{BooneCountyAR-NRHP-stub}} but first of all the template page does not look like a correct asbox page, and pages tagged with this template do not appear on the Northwest Arkansas NRHP stubs page. I've tried looking at various other examples of NRHP stub categories with these sorts of regional/county subdivisions such as New York, Oregon, and Maryland, but I couldn't figure out what I was doing wrong. Could somebody please help me out by creating a couple of the missing county templates in Northwest Arkansas to give me an example to work from for the remaining counties? Fixing {{BooneCountyAR-NRHP-Stubs}} and creating {{CarrollCountyAR-NRHP-Stubs}} would be fine. Furicorn (talk) 00:49, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Stub template as children of multiple parent stub categories[edit]

I was wondering if it is bad form to add an upmerged stub template to multiple stub categories? I was thinking {{SouthCarolina-plantation-stub}} might be worth adding an additional rollup specifically relating it to slavery, as the current parent is mostly about architecture. But reading through the guidelines, it was ambiguous what guidelines to use when deciding whether to add a stub to multiple stub parents. -Furicorn (talk) 21:22, 28 August 2017 (UTC|

Where was this template proposed? I can't find it in any of the monthly subpages of WP:WSS/P. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:12, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
I didn't realize upmerged templates needed to be proposed since they don't create new categories, I thought just new categories did. I will propose it now, but my question still stands about multiple categories on a single stub template -Furicorn (talk) 00:05, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
@Furicorn: Upmerged to what? There is no {{Plantation-stub}}; and whilst there is a Category:Plantation stubs, it is empty, and was created less than two hours ago by you, again without prior agreement. I see that you created a proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2017/August#Plantation stub templates less than three hours ago, but seem to have assumed agreement and jumped in with an overcomplicated structure that is not yet demonstrably needed. WP:WSS/P is clear: 5 days after listing it [at WSS/P], if there is general approval or no objection, go ahead and create the new category and/or template. You're not waiting for that.
First establish the need for the broader group, then determine if there is a need for a subdivision of the broad group; don't do it backwards. At each stage, create the template first, and only create the category once you can put 60+ pages into it (again, don't do it backwards). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for assuming consensus and jumping the gun creating the Plantation stubs category, I've gone ahead and blanked it out. As far as I understand the way upmerging works (which could be wrong, but I'll be using it in this sense for the rest of the post), {{SouthCarolina-plantation-stub}} upmerges to Category:South Carolina building and structure stubs, the same way that any of the following do
I don't care what structure gets used, I made a proposal because I was interpreting the response from Od Mishehu (talk · contribs) to mean that I should make a proposal about category hierarchy, so then I proposed stub categories that match the existing Category:Plantations hierarchy based on that misinterpretation. I did not know (and honestly am still unclear) if upmerged templates that do not create new categories can be made without a proposal. But, I am trying to act in good faith. -Furicorn (talk) 09:20, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
While creating and populating subcats for Category:Arkansas Registered Historic Place stubs (done well except for checking the actual stub count for individual counties, and there is one with 30 stubs and one with 39), and subsequently creating county-level tags to populate eventual subcats of Category:South Carolina Registered Historic Place stubs (all the tags were created correctly, and the 3 which have their own categories were done by me), Furicon was also adding other appropriate stub tags on these articles. Then Furicon started adding the plantation tag, which I agree was inappropriate until we have the tree set up. After that, Furicon proposed creating similar tags for other states, so I said we should start from the top of the tree. Furicon then created the root category, and proposed a structure - which I then corrected him/her about. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:24, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
A series of by-state plantation-stub templates might be useful, but I'd hold off on categories until we're sure of numbers. Upmerging them to the by-state building and structure stub categories seems a sensible way forward. But yes, in future please propose them first! Grutness...wha? 00:05, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
@Grutness:, thanks for the feedback on the idea about upmerging them to the by-state building templates! I would definitely appreciate it if you weigh in on my proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals#Plantation_stub_templates, the discussion there has additional information about stub counts. -Furicorn (talk) 04:56, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Updating Oversized stub categories table[edit]

Hey, I was wondering if there is a tool used to generate or update the Oversized stub categories table? Or if someone has any guidance about the best way to update the table? This conversation is cross-posted at Talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/To do. -Furicorn (talk) 02:39, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Suggestions for subdividing Category:Spilomelinae stubs[edit]

I'm trying to think of a good structure to subdivide Category:Spilomelinae stubs into more manageable groups of around 200, but the best I could think of was alphabetical categories by genus . Do people have any better ideas?

  1. GenusASpilomelinae-stub - 217 stubs
  2. GenusB-CisSpilomelinae-stub - 188 stubs
  3. GenusCna-DiaSpilomelinae-stub - 214 stubs
  4. GenusDic-FSpilomelinae-stub - 189 stubs
  5. GenusGad-LinSpilomelinae-stub - 200 stubs
  6. GenusLio-MimSpilomelinae-stub - 217 stubs
  7. GenusMuk-PanSpilomelinae-stub - 189 stubs
  8. GenusPar-PoliSpilomelinae-stub - 184 stubs
  9. GenusPoly-PseSpilomelinae-stub - 189 stubs
  10. GenusPyc-SatSpilomelinae-stub - 201 stubs
  11. GenusSca-SylSpilomelinae-stub - 290 stubs
  12. GenusSym-ZSpilomelinae-stub - 191 stubs

Cross-posted at Talk:WikiProject Lepidoptera

-Furicorn (talk) 05:51, 4 October 2017 (UTC)