Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/Not deleted/June 2005

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Geldof 27th

below is the demonstration listing used on

WP:SFD
during its proposal stage.

{{banana stub}} / Category:Banana stubs

Probably a hoax. Used on 0 articles. -- grm_wnr Esc 00:10, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Change scope to include stuff which is obviously bananas :)
  • Keep. Banana stubs are inherently notable. -- grm_wnr Esc 21:12, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, bananas are original research. Radiant_* 11:16, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
  • Redirect template to {{fruity-stub}}. I like bananas, because they have no bones. Grutness...wha? 11:55, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep what next? Plums, Strawberries, Oranges, High Schools?
    Rx StrangeLove 22:49, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply
    ]

June 19th

{{Canberra suburb stub}} / Category:Suburbs of Canberra (incomplete)

I just discovered this small (25) category has a parent, {{

the list), which is also small (22), and is better named both in template and category. Merge with parent -- grm_wnr Esc
20:41, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep: As stated in the stub message itself, these stubs are a tag associated with the Canberra WikiProject, the parent of which is WikiProject Cities. It is only be chance that I watch this stub template and thus discovered that this deletion tag was placed on it. No attempt has been made to notify wikipedians associated with the project that the templates have been nominated for deletion nor suggest the proposed merger to them. The sub-stub has the potential to be used on in excess of 50 articles as there are more than 50 suburbs of Canberra. The project is in progress.--AYArktos 21:34, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep: I noticed this project a little while ago and thought it was a cool idea. My own suburb could be expanded and there are plenty more with interesting histories. Pete 22:05, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep: fulfills a useful role as part of a wiki city project.--Takver 23:05, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • comment - at the very least this one should be run by the Canberra WikiProject before nything's decided. Which should probably be a general rule for this page anyway - if a stub has an associated wikiproject then something about the proposed deletion should be posted on that project's talk page. As for my vote, it is a small category, but it does seem to be in use, so I'm willing to let it be. I would,however, suggest changing the name of the category to Category:Canberra suburb stubs - the current name is, well, odd. Grutness...wha? 01:30, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, per Grutness' move. Ambi 03:25, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Grutness's suggestion.--
    TALK
    06:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Change my vote to keep and rename category. -- grm_wnr Esc 07:27, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and rename. Andreww 08:16, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Gruntness. Shem(talk) 18:41, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    "Gruntness"? Grutness...wha?
  • Keep and rename as per Grutness with one nAlan 06:30, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Category renamed, all articles moved. Grutness...wha? 28 June 2005 05:16 (UTC)

June 24th

{{
stubnotice
}}

Deprecated metatemplate. Again, first suggested for deletion in May on WP:WSS/C. Grutness...wha? 10:10, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Comment: Is this within the scope of this page? It is not a stub type. -- grm_wnr Esc 11:56, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Hmmm. Good question... it is a stub metatemplate, though. Do you think this might be better on tfd? Grutness...wha? 23:01, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • This would indeed best be handled by TfD. --
        Sn0wflake
        19:04, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • OK - I've moved it there. Grutness...wha? 00:44, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

{{dune-stub}} / Category:Dune stubs

Intended for articles related to

Richesians) since. Propose merge with parent {{sf-book-stub}}. Creator User:*Kat* has been notified. -- grm_wnr Esc
08:57, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Update: 22 articles now. -- grm_wnr Esc 14:19, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete. Even though there are a huge number of articles on various topics in the Dune Universe, almost all of them are way past stub size. Any existing Dune stubs should be restubbed as sf-book-stubs, and then the Dune stub should be vaporized. BlankVerse ∅ 09:44, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. There is a fair number of Dune articles which this could be added to and in fact if I had known that it had been created (I had seen discussion of it on
    WP:WSS/ST but didn't realise it had happened) then I would have populated it sooner. In any case I have populated it now. -- Lochaber
    11:09, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Agree with Lochabar- there's a lot out there that could be stubbed. Furthermore, I'm sure that as Wikipedia expands, people will keep creating articles about all the little things in Dune- remember the size of the glossary. Stilgar135 03:46, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • 'weak delete changed to keep. Too few articles (clearly bellow 100, and some of the 25 tagged look like they should be merged into minor characters of Dune); also only a marginal reduction on {{sf-book-stub}} which is not too big (yet?), with less than 200 articles. Weak vote because I may be misjudging the growth potential of both categories.--Nabla 2005-06-28 16:29:10 (UTC) Many people say it will grow... so let it. --Nabla 2005-07-01 22:47:30 (UTC)
  • Keep--for now. Category:Science ficion book stubs may not be overpopulated, but Category:Book stubs is! WP:WSS has hardly made a dent, that I can see, in that category. There are bound to be more science fiction books stubs in there, and very likely more Dune books stubs as well. I did not create that stub template because I am a huge fan of the Dune series--I'm not. I created that stub template because I kept coming across Dune stubs. If, after category:book stubs is brought down to a reasonable size, there still aren't enough articles to justify this template's continued existance, I think we should delete it. To delete it now though would be premature.
  • Keep - 26 articles --AYArktos 30 June 2005 02:32 (UTC)
  • Keep, now there are 38 articles in this category. Also considering the overpopulation of sf book stubs - Zanaq
  • Keep; I see the prospect of expansion Lectonar 30 June 2005 12:38 (UTC)
  • Keep. Yeah, I'll bite. It is showing growth, and could well grow further. Sf-book-stub is likely to need splitting further eventually, and this would be an obvious one to pare from it. Grutness...wha? 30 June 2005 13:00 (UTC)
  • Keep. Sarge Baldy July 3, 2005 02:14 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/Not_deleted/June_2005&oldid=1086090089"