Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2011/August

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 discussion was Upmerge. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:51, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unproposed, severely undersized, and with a misnamed category. The permcat (which is at Cat:Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam politicians) has only 26 articles (and the party has only had a total of 30 elected representatives, if the article on the party is anything to go by), so the chance of 60 of them being stubs is nil (just to rub things in, the permcat's articles are wildly under-defaultsorted, so almost all the articles appear under the politicians' first initial). Even if this were to get up to threshold, the category would need renaming to match the permcat. As it is, though, upmerging the template into Cat:Indian politician stubs seems the most logical thing to do. Grutness...wha? 03:24, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge template and delete category. Waacstats (talk) 11:32, 1 September 2011 (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 discussion was Delete -FASTILY ^(TALK) 06:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unproposed, unnecessary stub type, created by an editor who has created other unproposed, unnecessary stub types for Catalonia-related topics in the past. Neither Cat:Catalonia stubs (350 articles) nor Cat:Spanish sports venue stubs (160 articles) is in need of splitting, and if the former were, there would be more logical things to split out than this (e.g., railway stations). What's more, sports venues are not split by subnational region - they're split by nation and then by type of venue (horseracing/football/swimming/etc). Severely undersized, and unlinked to a permcat. Permcat has a little over 80 articles (multicatting of several articles makes it appear more, but the number is around 80), but many are beyond stub length, so even getting to the required number of stubs for a category is very unlikely. Delete. Grutness...wha? 01:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and I think if we do need to split then buildings would take sports venues and railway stations etc. Waacstats (talk) 11:35, 1 September 2011 (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 discussion was delete

Okay... where to start. (1) Unproposed; (2) contains a space in the name - against naming conventions; (3) São Paulo is a dab page (this is for the city, not the state) - also against naming conventions; (4) feeds directly into a permcat, not a stubcat; (5) no indication from Cat:Brazilian building and structure stubs that there is any need yet for a separate template; (6) if a separate template were to be needed, we would be splitting by state, not city, as per Brazil's geo-stubs. Six clear reasons for deletion. Grutness...wha? 11:46, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BTw, I have restubbed all of the articles using this (11 of them) with {{Brazil-struct-stub}} - this puts them in a stub category (which the nominated template didn't), and even if there is support for a São Paulo-struct-stub it will need a new name (probably {{SãoPauloState-struct-stub}}, to match the geo-stub). Also, all but two of them had the templates on the wrong place in the article :/ Grutness...wha? 11:57, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cat:Brazilian building and structure stubs isn't massive (approx 125 in the main cat and 125 in the sports venue sub cat) so I don't think splitting by state is hugely useful so I say delete. Severo^TC 10:19, 30 August 2011 (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 discussion was speedy rename, per rename of permcat

• Cat:Subcarpathian geography stubs → Cat:Podkarpackie geography stubs
• {{
  Subcarpathian-geo-stub}} → {{Podkarpackie-geo-stub
  }}

Speedy renames to match renamed article and categories. Severo^TC 07:25, 23 August 2011 (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 discussion was Rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:05, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As pointed out at WikiProject Western Australia after the recent rename of Perth-stub, "If Perth-stub has to be renamed because Perth's a dab page, why is Victoria-geo-stub used for

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 discussion was Keep as is for uniformity reasons. --

I propose renaming it to {{US-transportation-company-stub}}, per ENGVAR (fo the US we use "Transportation", not "Transport"), and permanently keep the redirect to make stub sorters' job easier. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 19:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• -transport- is used generically for all nations, in the same way that, say, -theatre- is — uniformity makes it easier because of the way asbox is set up to deal with these as being subtypes of a more generic name ({{transport-company-stub}}). No objection to a redirect from US-transportation-company-stub, but the template proper should probably stay where it is. Since template names are "hidden" anyway, it sdoesn't make much difference as long as the category name agrees with the permcat. Grutness...wha? 10:28, 22 August 2011 (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.

Simple rename - and the current name could possibly be kept as a redirect. We don't have a war-stub for this to be a subtype of (it was rolled into mil-hist-stub and deleted long ago), and it's the Vietnam War, not the Vietnam war, so the lower case in inappropriate. Grutness...wha? 01:57, 21 August 2011 (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 discussion was Uncontroversial Rename w/o redirect --

Propose renaming the following, to match recent changes to the generic stub type:

• {{UK-retail-stub}} → {{UK-retail-company-stub}}
• {{US-retail-stub}} → {{US-retail-company-stub}}

Preferable lose the redirects, also for the reasons in the earlier discussion. Grutness...wha? 01:01, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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 discussion was rename

Rename to Cat:East Midlands school stubs to match the rest of the regional categories in Cat:United Kingdom school stubs which use the same name as the regions (the West Midlands (region) has "(region)" purely to disambiguate it from the West Midlands (county); East of England is nominated below). Timrollpickering (talk) 11:29, 19 August 2011 (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 discussion was rename

This covers schools in the East of England region; the current name does not easily identify the category. Rename to Cat:East of England school stubs to bring clarity and match the region's article. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:56, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Grutness...wha? 01:17, 19 August 2011 (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 discussion was Rename --

Severo^TC 15:27, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support categories - seems to be permcat standard; weak support for templates - less urgent, but probably a good move...keeping the current names as redirects. Grutness...wha? 01:17, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It is not ambiguous in context and in general use rail means rail transport and the term rail is used often in wikipedia without having transport added to the end. Jamesrules90 (talk) 17:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that stub categories should, where possible, conform to the permanent category names... Grutness...wha? 00:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention that the permcat is at Cat:Rail transport and there is no reason for the stub categories to be any different. Severo^TC 08:53, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And when I first saw this category, I originally thought of Guard rails, not of trains. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:54, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have no objection since the specific term "rail transport" is commonly used (specifically within wikipedia eg maintenence categories etc). However what are the hyphens for? Generally I see no need for hyphens - they are counter intuitive - use them only when it has real meaning.Imgaril (talk) 16:02, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Standard stub template naming convention, indicating a subtype - as used on all of the several thousand different stub templates and supported by the coding of asbox. {{

WP:WSS/NC. Grutness...wha? 08:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Holy shit you're right - I checked all eighteen thousand in Category:Stub_message_boxes and they all do it, how could I have been so blind..Imgaril (talk) 22:45, 29 August 2011 (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 discussion was moved to "Kitchenware", keeping previous template name as a redirect with possibilities for a possible future Cat:Cooking utensil stubs

Permcat iks at Cat:Cooking utensils, stub cat should match it at Cat:Cooking utensil stubs, though perhaps a better permcat parent would be Cat:Kitchenware (meaning this should be at Cat:Kitchenware stubs. If the latter, Either the template should also be renamed or a new, separate {{Kitchenware-stub}} would be appropriate. Grutness...wha? 04:13, 18 August 2011 (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 discussion was rename to SEAsianGames-stub - delete current name

Similar to yesterdays nomination of Asian-games-stub, but with a bit more weirdness in the naming this time. There is no such place as South Easia, This is for the Southeast Asian Games, and as such should be either at {{SEAsian-Games-stub}} or {{SEAsianGames-stub}}. Either seems to be possible, at the moment, with a redirect from the other - but the current name is wrong, even for a redirect. Grutness...wha? 01:27, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Agree the name is wrong and confusing.Jamesrules90 (talk) 17:16, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{SEAsianGames-stub}} for me. South Easia sounds kind of Orwellian. Severo^TC 08:51, 21 August 2011 (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 discussion was moved to AsianGames-stub. Both other names kept as redirects

Reversal of redirect, per naming guidelines. Key article is at

{{AsianGames-stub}}, no? Severo^TC 12:20, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with {{

Asian-Games-stub}}, replaceability of Games with games and vice versa is really a mooting point. — Bill william compton^Talk 13:12, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Actually, Severo's probably right. Compare {{CommonwealthGames-stub}}. Both could be redirects to the new game quite acceptably, though. Grutness...wha? 01:22, 18 August 2011 (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 discussion was Rename. There's no permcat for this, but the permcats whose stubs would go here all use this style of dash. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Propose renaming

• true. It is speediably renameable though, iff the new name agrees with the permcat. Grutness...wha? 01:14, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• rename. Can stub categories like this that would normally qualify for speedy renaming go through the regular category speedy rename process if there is no change being made to the stub template? I'm unclear on that point. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:45, 22 August 2011 (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 discussion was rename

Propose renaming:

• Category:Actinopterygii stubs to Category:Ray-finned fish stubs
• Category:Chondrichthyes stubs to Category:Cartilaginous fish stubs

Rationalle: Per permcat names, Cat:Ray-finned fish and Cat:Cartilaginous fish. (Mismatch of fish/fishes is irrelevant for stub cats, as they use the singular form.) עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:09, 14 August 2011 (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 discussion was rename, but keep current names as redirects

• {{
  Berlin-U-Bahn-stub}} → {{Berlin-UBahn-stub
  }}
• {{
  Frankfurt-U-Bahn-stub}} → {{Frankfurt-UBahn-stub
  }}
• {{
  Hamburg-U-Bahn-stub}} → {{Hamburg-UBahn-stub
  }}
• {{
  Munich-U-Bahn-stub}} → {{Munich-UBahn-stub
  }}
• {{
  Nuremberg-U-Bahn-stub}} → {{Nuremberg-UBahn-stub
  }}

Rename and redirect templates: The stub types are not some kind of subtype of {{Bahn-stub}} and usually we drop the hyphens in names. Severo^TC 09:23, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Counter-intuitive. Agathoclea (talk) 09:27, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Still think it is counter-intuitive to anybody not involved in stub sorting as it just looks wrong. As far as Munich is concerned, there will be hardly any new stubs before 2014 (and then I dare them to get more than one station on that 1.3km extension) and only one in the last 3 years similarly there will be managable influx overall so I doubt stub-sorters will ever be bothered. But is is your baby really :-). Agathoclea (talk) 18:58, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  :) It's basically more to keep "all the ducks lined up" so that if any new templates are made for other U-bahns and S-bahns we don't have some at one name an some at another. Keeping to the usual naming conventions makes it less likely there'll be a mess! Grutness...wha? 07:59, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, per stub naming conventions. These are not subtypes of bahn-stub, which the current template name suggests (there is no such template). As such, it is the current names which are counterintuitive to anyone involved in sorting stubs (i.e., the people who use these templates). Grutness...wha? 10:08, 13 August 2011 (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 discussion was Rename all. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:26, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As noted on the road-stub template nominated below (Aug 11), Perth is a dab page, and permcats for the city are at Cat:Perth, Western Australia. As such, the following should be renamed, with the current name deleted:

• {{Perth-stub}} → {{PerthAU-stub}}
• {{Perth-geo-stub}} → {{PerthAU-geo-stub}}
• Cat:Perth geography stubs → Cat:Perth, Western Australia geography stubs

The main stub category is already at Cat:Perth, Western Australia stubs Grutness...wha? 10:08, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support move, as you say Perth is a disambig page, all categories are disambiguated so stubs should be also. Severo^TC 15:33, 14 August 2011 (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 discussion was upmerge, with no prejudice against re-creation if and when the number of stubs increases to acceptable levels

Extremely premature. Cat:Sport in South Sudan only contains 16 articles, so it seems unlikely there are the threshold-meeting 60 existing stubs. Upmerge both of the articles in this category (as was originally intended when the templates were created - looks like someone jumped the gun without proposing the category). Grutness...wha? 13:30, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Upmerge for now with no prejudice on recreation if/when 60 article theshold is met. Severo^TC 15:30, 14 August 2011 (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 discussion was Rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:47, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The one got left behind in the cleanup of rail-station to railstation from May 2011. Propose rename and leave a redirect in place. Severo^TC 10:55, 11 August 2011 (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 discussion was Rename --

I think we should rename the following templates, per Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/September#A group of redirect reversals:

• {{Czech-film-director-stub}} to {{CzechRepublic-film-director-stub}}
• {{
  Czech-film-stub}} to {{CzechRepublic-film-stub
  }}
• {{Czech-hist-stub}} to {{CzechRepublic-hist-stub}}
• {{Czech-school-stub}} to {{CzechRepublic-school-stub}}

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:15, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all as they are, per the arguements at the releated CfD. Lugnuts (talk) 19:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename - This has nothing to do with changing category names - these are template names which do not meet standard WSS nomenclature. The categories would not be changed. In any case, even if categories were involved, stub types are in general by nationality/location, not ethnicity. Most of the arguments being bandied around in the CfD nomination do not apply - this is especially the case with the school type, as it is very difficult to argue that a school in the Czech Republic is not a Czech Republic school. What'smore, the arguments at CfD relate to the nationality/ethnicity of individual people, in which case they could only possibly apply to the first of these four nominations. Grutness...wha? 01:50, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Do not rename. I don't think that introducing or perpetuating differences between usage in stub categories and normal categories is a good idea, and in normal categories "Czech" is the demonym for things from the Czech Republic. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • These are only template names - and the naming conventions for stub templates are "currentcountryname-foo-stub" (e.g., {{Australia-school-stub}} and {{Germany-geo-stub}}, not {{Australian-school-stub}} and {{German-geo-stub}}). No-one's suggesting changing the categories at all. And all other similar templates already use CzechRepublic- .Grutness...wha? 02:25, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • D'oh, yes. Brain freeze on my part. Thank you. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:33, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename per Grutness. I read way too fast on this and assumed it was about categories. I see no problem with making this change. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:33, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Partly my fault - my original comments clouded the water (I've since refactored them a bit). Grutness...wha? 02:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment So are all films and film directors in these stubs from the Czech Republic? What about people/films that happened before the formation of the Czech Republic? Lugnuts (talk) 07:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • As with other countries, they're listed by the current national borders. It makes for more effective stubbing. That way, someone born, say in what is now Macedonia or Belarus 100 years ago and still alive wouldn't need about half a dozen national stubs. Thus, for instance,
    Gradinja of Duklja is marked with a Montenegro-bio-stub, even though - as the article's name suggests, he was from the nation of Duklja (Montenegro was not to come into existence until several hundred years after he died). Similarly, Ceol of Wessex is listed with a United Kingdom nobility-related stub, even though the IUnited Kingdom didn't exist when he was alive. Grutness...wha? 00:38, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Can you point me to the policy that states this? If the Czech Republic ceases to exist today, we'd delete all the stubs and rename them to the new nations? Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 09:14, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not policy, but an entrenched part of WP:WSS's naming conventions. And yes, we would, though we would leave redirects from the former country's name. The country has never been called simply "Czech" however. Grutness...wha? 19:51, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Not policy" - Note to closing admin there's no policy to rename this, and

WP:COMMONSENSE should apply. Czech and Czech Republic are not the same thing. Lugnuts (talk) 13:32, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

"Naming convention". "Czech and Czech Republic are not the same thing." That's the entire point - Czech Republic is a country, "Czech" has never been the name of a country, and stub names use country names as their descriptors. Why should the Czech Republic's stubs be treated in a different way to every other country on earth's stubs? There has never been a country called "Czech", so why would this be the only stub group which does not use a country name - especially when other stub types covering the same area are all at CzechRepublic-foo-stub? These are stubs for the Czech Republic, and historic articles for that area currently in the Czech Republic. As such, naming convention is for Czech Republic to be used. Grutness...wha? 00:36, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ever had one of those days when you can't see the wood for the trees? Yes, I now see the point of "Czech" not existing as a country. D'oh. Lugnuts (talk) 09:15, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all Czech is fine as it covers both Czechoslovakia and Czech Republic and there is often considerable overlap. What about the films in Czechoslovakia pre 1990s? You can't rename Czech-film-stub or Czech-history-stub etc as through most of Czech history Czech Republic did not even exist!! Of course you could create those suggested as well.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:59, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Films pre-1990 would presumably be marked with {{Czechoslovakia-stub}}, one of the few stubs which is specifically designed for a former country. The history stubs relate to the history of the country now called the Czech Republic - Dr.B, you know stubbing conventions well enough to know that it's standard practice for history stubs to be marked with a current country's stub type, and that that type's name always starts with a noun - otherwise we could have dozens of templates on om articles, all referring to the same place. And which of the schools marked with Czech-school-stub are currently in Czechoslovakia? Grutness...wha? 19:51, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all per stub naming conventions which use country name, not denonym. I don't see any argument that applies to school or film stubs, as any from Czechoslovakia can use {{Czechoslovakia-stub}}. The history and film director stubs I have more sympathy but we can't treat the Czech Republic different just because there isn't a common single-word name for the country. Severo^TC 14:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all – to the name Czechia. This is the proper short name of this country, this is the variant suggested (and used) by the Czech geographs and historians. (But, unfortunately, denied by politicians and bosses of tourist industry – here is not space to discuss why it is so.) Because the Czech Republic exist only since 1969 (as the Czech Socialist Republic within the scope of the Czechoslovak Federation) or rather since 1993 (after dividing of Czechoslovakia), there is a problem – reflected in comments above me – with era before these years. Using of short geographical name perfectly solves such ambiguity. --Iaroslavvs (talk) 23:50, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apart from the fact that no one (at least outside the Czech Republic) uses the term Czechia (even if such a term would clear things up here) and it still goes against stub naming guidelines. Severo^TC 11:46, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename all per nom. Agathoclea (talk) 13:49, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all. That was patent nonsense trying to rename it. --Snek01 (talk) 00:38, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • While I understand that some users may oppose my proposal, I find it objectionable that you would refer to it as
    patent nonsense. I'm requesting that these stub tags be brought in line with the realted tags - in this case, the other tags for the same country. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• Rename - old naming is confusing: "Czech" means many things Czech, "CzechRepublic" is single meaning. Lodni Vandr (talk) 03:00, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all - No need to change, works fine as is. Dolovis (talk) 15:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The current names of these tags don't match names of all the other related tags,namely the other tags of the same country. If you think that the name "CzechRepublic" is wrong, feel free to nominate {{CzechRepublic-stub}} for renaming. Unless that category is renamed, I think that all other tags of this country should match {{CzechRepublic-stub}}. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:19, 27 September 2011 (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 discussion was Upmerge the category, move and redirect the template. --

I think we should upmerge the category as underpopulated (a quick scan shows only 26 stubs) and rename the template per Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/September#A group of redirect reversals. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:59, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Assuming {{NI-election-stub}} is not ambiguous it may be kept as a redirect to {{NorthernIreland-election-stub}}, just as with the -geo- stub template. - Nabla (talk) 13:17, 29 September 2011 (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 discussion was delete - again

Delete - created in October 08 as a redirect to {{EU-stub}}. Clearly a violation of standard stub tag naming, and a stub tag (not a redirect) by this name was previously deleted at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/June. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:39, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think this would probably count as a speedy delete, especially as its unused. A non-spacey {{

EuropeanUnion-stub}} redirect might be appropriate, though. Grutness...wha? 06:41, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Just realised this had previously been deleted through SFD, so yes, speediable. Grutness...wha? 00:48, 16 August 2011 (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 discussion was delete. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 14:41, 13 September 2011 (UTC) Old redirect left behind from an old SFD move to {{WesternAustralia-road-stub}}, no longer used. I think we should delete it. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:14, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, especially since Perth is hardly unambiguous... Grutness...wha? 06:40, 11 August 2011 (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 discussion was delete. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 14:41, 13 September 2011 (UTC) I discovered this while looking back at old SfD discussions. This is a redirect to {{US-footy-bio-stub}}, and has nothing to do with what in the US is called football. This template is unused; I think we should delete it. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:09, 11 August 2011 (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 discussion was Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:48, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An embarrassing throwback to the early days of stub-sorting. Fails the "what it says on the label" test - this is a redirect to {{NewZealand-stub}}, not a stub type for the bird species. Now rarely in use, the number of articles which it is on has shrunk markedly over the years. Created way back in 2004 by a naive young stubsorter called User:Grutness, and quickly moved to its current, more NC-compliant name. It also frees up the name in the unlikely event we need it for apterygidae. Delete. Grutness...wha? 02:25, 11 August 2011 (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 discussion was upmerge

Undersized (47 articles) in a permcat of 51 articles showing no sign of reaching usual 60 threshold any time soon. Delete the category and upmerge the template to Cat:German rapid transit stubs. Severo^TC 16:41, 8 August 2011 (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 discussion was rename

Rename to match both article Prague Metro and permcat (Cat:Prague Metro). Severo^TC 16:41, 8 August 2011 (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 discussion was rename. Note that upmerging will be needed if the category does not grow.

Unproposed and misnamed. Key article is Arabic music, as is clear in the link (permcat is currently at CFR in order to match it to the key article). No sign that it is likely to approach threshold, either, with currently only a dozen or so stubs. Propose rename of template to {{Arabic-music-stub}} and upmerge, though a case could be made for keeping this consistent with other stub types at {{MEast-music-stub}} with Cat:Middle Eastern music stubs iff threshold is reached. Grutness...wha? 01:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to {{Arabic-music-stub}} is fine. This stub is needed and so far has been added to few articles. Similar stubs exist for other types of ethnic music. --Kleinzach 02:04, 8 August 2011 (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 discussion was Rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to match both stubcat and permcat parents. Grutness...wha? 01:25, 7 August 2011 (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 discussion was rename -FASTILY ^(TALK) 07:39, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename {{Cricket-admin-stub}} to {{Cricket-org-stub}} - a stub type populated by cricket governing bodies and other organizations. It's not a subtype of {{Admin-stub}} as that doesn't exist but it is a subtype of {{sport-org-stub}} so propose renaming in line with other foo-org-stubs. Severo^TC 10:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking. Note that there is no Cat:Cricket organisations, but there is a Cat:Cricket administration. Currently the template upmerges to Cat:Cricket stubs. Would this be upmerged to Cat:Cricket administration despite the name discrepancy, or should a permcat be created for orgs in general? Pegship (talk) 17:16, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would have thought a permcat for the orgs would be a good idea, but best to run it past WP:WikiProject Cricket, who are even more thoroughly organised than the stub-sorters! Grutness...wha? 01:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's an odd one: Cat:Cricket administration is categorised within Cat:Sports governing bodies by sport. Sports governing bodies by sport naturally hosts organisations: most categories within it are called "organiz(s)ations" or "governing bodies": cricket is the only one called "administration" (the other odd-one-out is "Gliding associations" but I think association is similar enough to organization). So Cat:Cricket administration it is de facto for organizations. Perhaps best to take the permcat to CFD first... Severo^TC 04:53, 18 August 2011 (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 discussion was Upmerge both. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two seriously undersized Algerian geo-stub categories have appeared - unproposed and in need of upmerging. Unfortunately there's no possibility of these getting to threshold given the current number of articles marked with a plain {{Algeria-stub}}.

• Cat:Oran Province geography stubs (28 articles)
• Cat:Naâma Province geography stubs (14 stubs)

Grutness...wha? 09:41, 6 August 2011 (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.