Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/2006/August/25

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion 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 upmerge

There are only 4 articles in this category. So it should be deleted. Furthermore it lacks a category (i.e. it makes red links). Finally the stub category might be a bit premature, because any entry on the 2008 olympics will be a stub until they are held. C mon 20:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Wow, they do say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery... I see no body of articles on this topic -- and nor should there be, for obvious
  WP:NOT reasons -- so delete for the next two years. Granted that the parent is quite large, at over 700 articles, but I'm pretty sure that 1984 is a more likely candidate... (Someone remind me to check after the next db dump.) Alai 20:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete per above. Grutness...wha? 23:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Caerwine Caerwhine 00:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep. I created it because in the next 2 years, pages on these games may pop up or may need to use this template. There are lots of pages now that should use it but aren't because I created it after the stubs were made, and haven't gotten around to adding them to it. It also follows the previous years (e.g.
  (t)  17:41, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • It follows the pattern, but not the size guidelines, or the proposal process (for both of which, see
    WP:STUB). Alai 04:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• Category created during run of this nomination, and tagged immediately prior to this edit. Alai 04:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I've found and tagged another 16 of these, so I propose to close this as an upmerge unless someone objects, or wishes to close it on a different basis. Alai 04:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 deletion 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 delete

Found that the category had been marked for SFD for a while with seemingly no action, so I'm just bringing it all here. 17 articles in a category with a really small scope, and a very ambiguous abbreviation for the template. --fuzzy510 15:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Note that this has been SFD'd twice this year already. Alai 17:03, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, this one was a disappoinment, I'd hoped for something about lost European traditions, I don't know like Kung-Fu from Spain or whatever. Instead, all articles are about fencing, all but two are -bios and nothing "interesting" at all. Delete Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 17:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. If it's been deleted twice before, then speedily delete. Nothing here that couldn't be better covered by a fencing-stub, by the looks of it - are there enough stubs for one of them? Grutness...wha? 23:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • It hasn't, I said it's been SFD'd twice, i.e., in the spirit of "do we have to rehash this again?", not "speedy it". Alai 01:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was unaware that it had been brought here at all. Really, if I didn't see the SFD template on the category, I'd have never brought it here. --fuzzy510 15:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oh, good point, I didn't notice that the last SFD hadn't been closed. OK, let's just retag them with fencing-stub, bio-stub, and/or hist-stubs as appropriate, and delete this, at the third attempt. Alai 16:25, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 deletion 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 delete

38 articles in this category. The template is poorly named, and the convention right now is to split by country, not league. --fuzzy510 19:51, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• But given the size of Cat:United States basketball biography stubs, the question is, how do we then split those? This doesn't seem like the way to do it though, if it's not populable, and leads to much double-doubling, both of which seem likely. Can't we split by position? Or failing which, era/decade? Alai 20:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Position would be my preference to split it, if there are permcats for the different basketball positions. Decade would be my next choice. League simply isn't going to be viable - without looking, I'd bet that 80% of the stubs in there are NBA players, which won't do much to help once it's split. (For the record, deleting this stub type doesn't seem to do much to worsen the situation with US basketball bios, since a lot seem to be either double-tagged with the US tag, or not from the US.) --fuzzy510 20:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think there are such permcats (in either instance). I'll grant you that's an almighty nuisance, as for one thing it reduces the chances of doing this by 'bot to zero but I don't think it should stop us in theory... You're obviously correct about a per-league split only potentially helping with a couple of "chips", not the whole block. Alai 20:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • As creator of these categories, it wouldnt bother me seeing Nblbio-stub go, as long as the other category stays put. As for renaming the NBL player stubs, I dont really see the point as Australian basketball isnt at that depth yet.
        asrocks ^(talk) 23:17, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
        ]
        • I'm totally confused, what other category? Only one category is nominated for deletion. As to lack of a necessity to clarify "NBL": see that page. I've only just realized it wasn't the National Basketball League that was being referred to (hence my comment about US bios above). Delete as undersized, a split on the wrong axis, and horribly confusingly named. Alai 06:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 deletion 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 rename

Simply to keep up with the normal standard. Only a select few countries don't use the ethnic name in the category name, and since this one was not actually created by us, the creator almost certainly just didn't know. --fuzzy510 20:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Support move, though also sympathize with creator, given the obtuseness of the "rule" as to when we use "Greece", and when we use "Greek". Alai 20:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Heck, I'm happy just to have one less country's worth of football bios to sort out..... --fuzzy510 20:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per nom. Caerwine Caerwhine 00:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 deletion 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 rename

The parent refers to "United States", as do every other sports biography category involving the United States. Not really that important, but I'm apparently unusually obsessive about consistency today...... --fuzzy510 20:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Obsessive support. Alai 20:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• ditto. Grutness...wha? 23:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose The non-stub parent uses American, not United States as per the naming conventions for non-stub biography categories. We should be moving stub biography categories to match those conventions, not in opposition to them . Caerwine Caerwhine 00:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 deletion 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 rename

The parent refers to "United States", as do every other sports biography category involving the United States. Not really that important, but I'm apparently unusually obsessive about consistency today...... --fuzzy510 20:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Support compulsively and consistently. Alai 20:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Nitpicking support from here too. Grutness...wha? 23:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose The non-stub parent uses American, not United States as per the naming conventions for non-stub biography categories. We should be moving stub biography categories to match those conventions, not in opposition to them . Caerwine Caerwhine 00:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 deletion 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 delete

Stub category for the reality TV show. It's been around for nearly 3 months, and has 7 articles. We've shot down many stub types for individual shows before, and I certainly don't see this one having much of a special case. --fuzzy510 20:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless shown to be at least somewhat more populable, possible upmerge to {{
  reality-tv-stub}}, co-incidentally recently proposed if that's itself viable. Alai 20:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete without hesitation. Far too narrowly scoped. Will never reach a useful threshold. --TheParanoidOne 20:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A different stub tag can be used for the few articles that actually need it.
  JD ^{wants e-mail} 21:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete, or at the very least rename the template to correct capitalisation. Grutness...wha? 23:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or upmerge per Alai. Caerwine Caerwhine 00:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Upmerge per Alai or delete. --CComMack (t•c) 06:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.