Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals

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

Speedy create categories:

• Cat:Plzeň Region geography stubs - 61 stubs of {{Plzeň-geo-stub}}
• Cat:Vysočina Region geography stubs - 63 stubs of {{Vysočina-geo-stub}}
• Cat:Ústí nad Labem Region geography stubs - 72 stubs of {{ÚstíNadLabem-geo-stub}}

- Darwinek (talk) 16:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• Sounds eminently speediable to me. Go for it. Grutness...wha? 23:05, 27 November 2007 (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

A speediable, per more precedent than I care to recall - Cat:Bahrain geography stubs, 60 stubs. Grutness...wha? 06:28, 26 November 2007 (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

There are currently 59 pages that link to {{Utah-radio-station-stub}}, which I feel is sufficient to warrant these particular stubs getting their own category, a sub-category of Category:Western United States radio station stubs. (These stubs and related articles are maintained by WP:WPRS.) - JPG-GR (talk) 00:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

• Even closer. One more stub? Grutness...wha? 00:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Found one. Support. Waacstats (talk) 23:39, 28 November 2007 (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

Category is around 650. Therefore, I recommend breaking it down by continent with templates when needed. The US will need its own category. What do you think of a national team stub?--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 18:47, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

• Sounds like a resonable split and i agree with the national team stub as there appear to be around 70 of them. Waacstats (talk) 12:13, 25 November 2007 (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 keep template, don't create cat yet

• I am about a add a number of stub articles about vaccines, and marking them with {{vaccine-stub}}. A Cat:Vaccine stubs category would be very useful for this. -- The Anome (talk) 15:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
• Yes, indeed, and once there are 60 articles tagged with it, a category will be appropriate. I suggest we upmerge the template until such time. Also, it would be more constructive to propose the template before creating it, although it seems reasonably formed to me. Her Pegship (tis herself) 17:20, 24 November 2007 (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

Getting close to oversized, normally we split these by nationality the only ones that are clear at the moment are

• {{US-RC-bishop-stub}} / Cat:American Roman Catholic bishop stubs
• {{UK-RC-bishop-stub}} / Cat:British Roman Catholic bishop stubs

or we could split out the archbishops

• {{RC-archbishop-stub}} / Cat:Roman Catholic archbishop stubs

Waacstats (talk) 10:37, 24 November 2007 (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

Category is close to oversize and the following would all have over 100 articles and follow established pattern.

• {{US-film-actor-1890s-stub}} / Cat:American film actor, 1890s birth stubs
• {{US-film-actor-1880s-stub}} / Cat:American film actor, 1880s birth stubs
• {{US-film-actor-1870s-stub}} / Cat:American film actor, 1870s birth stubs

Waacstats (talk) 21:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy 'em, by well-established precedent. Alai (talk) 14:26, 25 November 2007 (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

I think an Cat:Italian cuisine stub should be added along the lines of those for other cuisines, such as Spain-cuisine-stub or Turkey-cuisine-stub. Most articles in the categories: Italian Cuisine, Italian desserts, Italian cheeses, etc. would be candidates for stubs.- AKeen (talk) 15:20, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

• Any idea how many candidate existing stub articles? There's also the issue of whether this should be an {{Italy-cuisine-stub}} or a {{Italy-food-stub}} -- did we make any decision to standardise in one direction or the other? Alai (talk) 18:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
  • we didn't, IIRC, but -cuisine- would have a slightly wider scope, so I'd favour that. Grutness...wha? 23:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I'd say cuisine as well, and there are 150+ articles that currently have simply the Italy or Cuisine stub that would be better categorized by this one. - AKeen (talk) 15:31, 26 November 2007 (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

• Cat:Pigeon breeds stubs this would be best under the sub category of *Cat:Columbiformes stubs There are enough breeds of domesticated pigeons List of pigeon breeds to warrant creation of this stub as the list of articles is growing all the time. Sting_au Talk 03:41, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Numerically plausible (I can count at least 54), but see my comment about the naming of the permcat, which would also apply here. Alai (talk) 04:27, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes I've read it (thanks for your input) and left a reply. Sting_au Talk 05:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

• Cat:Domesticated pigeon breeds stubs so does that look any better? Sting_au Talk 05:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Sounds sensible to me, assuming there are no (counter-)objections to the CFR. Alai (talk) 05:42, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
    • The Category has been created. I'll go ahead with the new stub. (when I find some time). Sting_au Talk 06:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
      • Should this be Cat:Domestic pigeon breed stubs, singular? Her Pegship (tis herself) 15:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It's done Cat:Domesticated pigeon breed stubs and being populated. Sting_au Talk 01:12, 28 November 2007 (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 majority of these look presently intractable, since huge numbers consist of just "is a plant pathogen", a taxonomy infobox, and a couple of stub tags and external links, with (believe it or not) nothing to indicate what it is they actually affect -- especially for fungi, which are the vast bulk of these. Oh well. In the meantime, I think it might be worthwhile splitting off those cases where the infective agent is actually something else:

• Cat:water mould plant disease stubs
• Cat:animal plant disease stubs

The animals might be a little light at 55ish, but I'm inclined to invoke "any port in a storm" here. This would seem to leave behind mainly the parasitic plants, but there don't seem to many of those at all. Alai (talk) 05:01, 19 November 2007 (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

'90s and '00s rock albums are oversized, as usual: likeliest-looking split in each case looks like "pop rock".

• Cat:1990s pop rock album stubs
• Cat:2000s pop rock album stubs

Alai (talk) 03:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• not a term I like but it is used on permcats so I don't see why not. Waacstats (talk) 10:42, 24 November 2007 (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 broader Canada-gov-bio-stub

I thought I'd proposed this before, but I can't find such a thing. At any rate, I can find 60 under Cat:Canadian civil servants (this could be scoped slightly more narrowly as Cat:Canadian civil servant stubs, if people prefer). Alai (talk) 02:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• The government-bios would be more inclusive and i feel more useful in cutting down the size of the canadian parent. Also fits in with other splits better (we have US gov split but no civil servent split anywhere). Waacstats (talk) 10:41, 24 November 2007 (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 elapidae-stub

Cat:Snake stubs contains roughly 600 articles - none sub-categorized - and Colubridae is by far the largest family in the Serpentes. So .... - Metanoid (talk, email) 12:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

• See previous discussion here, closed with no consensus. Her Pegship (tis herself) 16:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose, per previous discussion (not needed, too big to be a sensible initial split, too poorly-defined). If you really must split out a family, do Cat:Elapidae stubs. Alai (talk) 17:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • read discussion, makes sense, thanks. - Metanoid (talk, email) 19:35, 18 November 2007 (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

Cat:Electronics stubs is oversized, this looks like the most coherent subcat that I can discern. Alai (talk) 03:48, 17 November 2007 (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

Cat:Politics stubs is oversized, NZ seems to be the leading candidate for a fresh split. (60-odd constituencies, mainly.) Alai (talk) 01:48, 17 November 2007 (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 Australia-plant-stub

I realize we don't ordinarily split plants and animals by region, but we have 64 articles already tagged with {{Australia-stub}}, which is currently just over 800. (Most are flora, but it's not quite as clear-cut whether that's separately viable or not.) Alai (talk) 01:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• On closer examination, it looks as if a -plant- type would indeed be viable. Alai (talk) 17:26, 18 November 2007 (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

• Proposed as an upmerged template to both Cat:Livestock stubs and Cat:Even-toed ungulate stubs primary intent is to advance the working of Wikipedia:WikiProject Agriculture in sorting and improving these articles, thus not calling it {{Pig stub}} as that would imply all of genus Sus not just Sus scrofa domestica, other pigs should not be in Cat:Livestock.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 05:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Mmmmm. I can remember suggesting this was getting close to a split when someone proposed a chicken-stub last month. Problem is, as you point out, not all pigs are domestic (we have "tuskers" living only a few kilometres from where I live, in fact). Perhaps the best way to tackle this is with two stub types:

• {{pig-stub}} / Cat:Pig stubs as a subtype of the E-T ungulates, and
• {{domestic-pig-stub}} upmerged into Cat:Pig stubs and Cat:Livestock stubs

Otherwise, we'll end up with a gap in the (admittedly shaky) hierarchy. Pig-stub could also be used for pig-related things like swine diseases, and would very likely meet threshold. Note, BTW, the standard stub naming convention with the hyphens ({{Pig stub}} etc. are definitely out!) Grutness...wha? 08:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh yes, of course, I spaced the hyphens (literally). If the intermediate stub template and stub cat are necessary, fine. Doesn't really make any difference to me. Does the heading for the proposal need to be modified?--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 09:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

probably - I've altered it to suit. Grutness...wha? 09:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the intermediate type is necessary, but it does seem to make things a little neater. Support both. Alai 17:16, 15 November 2007 (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 Mexico-metro-stub / Mexico rapid transit stubs

There are lots of existing articles about the Mexico city metro system, and there really isn't a way to categorize them, except for using a {{mexico-stub}}. --θnce θn this island ^Speak! 13:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• I think the usual way this would be titled would be {{MexicoCity-metro-stub}} / Cat:Mexico city rapid transit stubs. But I'm wondering whether a more general scope would be better i.e {{Mexico-metro-stub}} / Cat:Mexico rapid transit stubs as I believe both Monterrey and Guadalajara also have rapid transit systems that could then be tagged with this template. Waacstats 18:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
  • The reason I had suggested it originally on Mexico city was because there seemed to be a lot of articles on the Mexico City metro system itself, but I agree that a more general topic would also be OK. --θnce θn this island ^Speak! 19:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support the more general Mexico-metro-stub. It's unlikely Guadalajara and Monterrey will have enough stubs for their own category any time soon, but this puts them somewhere where editors will be likely to find them readily. If numbers allow later, the three can always be split by city. Grutness...wha? 23:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
• Support a Mexico-in-general stub category, with per-city upmerged templates. Alai 02:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

• Support the idea of per city templates but i think we also need a general template incase anywhere else has a metro system.Waacstats 16:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

• A general metro system template? Or a general Mexico metro system Template? --θnce θn this island ^Speak! 19:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

• sorry a general mexico-metro-stub template. Waacstats 15:05, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Unless WP's article on the subject is sadly mistaken, it would appear that there are only three such systems in Mexico at present. And if another gets built, let's float the boat out and make another template for that one, too. OTOH, a country-level template would probably be what the casual sorter would expect (assuming they expected there to be such a thing at all), so I agree that creating that too seems sensible. Alai 02:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Agree with points raised above, Support a general mexico-metro-stub template and category. --θnce θn this island ^Speak! 01:22, 15 November 2007 (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 upmerged

There were no stub categories for Support Groups that I could find. This includes Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Gamblers Anonymous, family support groups, peer counseling, et cetera. Parasane 22:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

• mmmm. An interesting one, it falls through the gaps next to med-org-stub... probably worthwhile to at least have an upmerged template... how many stubs do you think there are for this? Grutness...wha? 00:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• I ran into this problem a while back while slogging through the org-stubs. If the count supports it, so do I. Her Pegship (tis herself) 22:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• I'm trying to get a definitive count. There's one stub article listed as "Sponsee", which was a term I wasn't even familiar with until I watched the latest episode of Dexter. I'll post count updates as I find qualifying stubs, and I'd like to request that others post their findings as well. Parasane 21:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• So how about an upmerged {{support-org-stub}} or {{support-group-stub}}? Her Pegship (tis herself) 02:25, 24 November 2007 (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

Queensland's bang on 800. This regions seems to be fairly well-defined, and there's 96 of 'em. Alai 03:36, 4 November 2007 (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

Early in the year, Category:Ohio geography stubs was subdivided into eight regional categories, based on county lines, in large part because there were hundreds of these articles. Category:Ohio school stubs has many hundreds of articles in it, as well. Two subcategories exist, for schools in two of the eight aforementioned regions — Category:Cleveland-Akron-Elyria school stubs and Category:Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe school stubs — and I don't see why we shouldn't have the other eight. Therefore, I'm proposing the following regional school categories:

• Category:Greater Cincinnati school stubs
• Category:Dayton-Springfield-Greenville school stubs
• Category:East Central Ohio school stubs
• Category:Northwest Ohio school stubs
• Category:Southeastern Ohio school stubs
• Category:Southern Ohio school stubs

The two existing categories use county based stub tags (as do the geography stubs): for example, schools in Ashtabula County, Ohio have {{AshtabulaOH-school-stub}}. Therefore, I propose that the same process be done for the sixty-eight counties in the other six regions. Nyttend 05:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Sounds reasonable (assuming the regions reach the usual 60-stub level for categories) - county templates would allow us to split further later if required (God forbid...) Grutness...wha? 08:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
• Given the constant stream of these, and further given the latest edict from on-high (or in at, from inside-oligarchy) that anon article creation's to be re-enabled, I'd predict this happening sooner rather than later, unless we quite literally run out of schools first. Alai 14:11, 1 November 2007 (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 proposal withdrawn

Nicely oversized, and has branched to subcategories Cat:United States comics creator stubs and Cat:United Kingdom comics creator stubs, but more pressing than UK is the proposed

• Cat:European comics creator stubs / {{Euro-comics-creator-stub}}

MURGH ^disc. 17:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Firstly Going by Template:CL the first template would be {{FrancoBelgian-comics-creator-stub}} FB is an electronic group who apparently have nothing to do with comics. Secondly "Oversized" in stub sorting terms means over 800 not the 600 articles here. Given that I would support the Euro category and template (assuming there are 60 articles) but not the Franco-Belgian ones, maybe templates for France-comics-creator-stub and a similar one for Belgium upmerged to the Euro category. Waacstats 18:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Strong oppose to the needly cryptic and ambiguous "FB-" element, per Waacstats. And can the comics crowd please try to wean themselves off of WPJ links on templates that'll be getting transcluded into articles? Having said that, since we do have a {{FrancoBelgian-comics-stub}}, a "-creator-" subtype isn't entirely unreasonable. However, since most people have a nationality, upmerged templates (to either cat) seem preferable. Alai 18:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Strong oppose to the FB- element, per above. Not really that keen on the FrancoBelgian name, though there is precedent. I'd personally prefer two templates (France- and Belgium-) both feeding into the same category. Grutness...wha? 07:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• The end result naming of this is obviously no biggie, and was only put forth as a parallel to US-comics-creator-stub and UK-comics-creator-stub templates. Whatever is wise. Could User:Alai please explain a bit more thoroughly what WP:CMC people should wean themselves off?
  The French-Francophone Belgian comics culture is a rather unique phenomenon (to which the Francophone Swiss invisibly belong) and dissecting will likely often lead to articles doubly sorted. MURGH ^disc. 22:33, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• Aha, User:Alai means to avoid links to the wikiproject within the stub template. I see. While trying to learn, I followed a model I assumed to be by the book, but not so.. MURGH ^disc. 01:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, that's it. I was especially bemused because the most obvious parent no longer has such a link, but I can see now you were basing it off of the other possible such. Sorry for my grumpiness on the topic, it just seems to be one of these revanant issues.
• I understand the rationale for the Franco-Belgian scope, and indeed even for a common template for the existing type. But for people, how common would it be for someone to have to double-tagged with both? Alai 02:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• Well you're right, when it comes to individuals, the double nationality is extremely rarely an issue ;) (Greg the only on top of my head..) I guess my point is that as articles no longer are stubs they'll be correctly categorised by nationality, but while still stubs (incomplete, unsourced and lacking in several ways) accessible to people working on francophone comics creator articles, it's nice to have these batched together. MURGH ^disc. 15:25, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• And that's exactly what upmerger (i.e., separate templates, and a single category) would do, surely. Alai 15:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• What can I say. If I understand you correctly, what's the point? You create a bin for sorting stuff out, how much sorting is crucial prior to sorting? I don't have the knowledge to create "upmerge" stubs and would rather avoid instruction creep. Just a simple need, and a simple request. MURGH ^disc. 00:45, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• In what sense is this "instruction creep"? You mean the creep in reading existing instructions, as against the addition of new ones? Or has this become some generic term of deprecation these days? The point is to keep templates in a reasonably standard format, and secondarily to facilitate re-splitting, should that become necessary later. To have every other French biography tagged with a "France-" template, but the ones that happen to be on comics people tagged with "FrancoBelgian-" would be needlessly inconsistent to the point of being quite baroque, and makes the lives of people trying to play "guess the template" when sorting to this type further unnecessarily diffculty. I've no idea what you mean by "sorting prior to sorting". The solution I've outlined seems perfectly simple. Alai 01:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• Good grief. Nothing prevents (and let me assure you there will be) a Franco-Belgian comics creator stub with an adjacent French bio stub, please realise that. This is not the stub template to end all be all, but one of a highly temporary nature that has some specific utility for this particular project in symmetry with other existing cats/stub templates. There is US, there is UK, the need is for Franco-Belgian. Noone insists UK be split to English, Scot, Welsh, Northern Irish at a stub level, yet these eventually become populated bio categories. The point is to have a stub that isn't derived from a person's passport but the culture in which she operates. MURGH ^disc. 10:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• Um, yes it does. The whole purpose of subtypes like this are to reduce the number of stubs in the parent stub categories. Thus, a Foo-comics-creator-stub would deliberately be employed to reduce the generic Foo-bio-stub category. Thus UK-comics-creator-stub replaces UK-bio-stub on articles using it, for example. That's the whole reason why we stick to the scheme of nationality for stub types. Creating stub types based on a person's perceived culture is fraught with complications and difficulties, which is why we specifically don't do that. If that is the intention of this particular stub type, then no, it is not the best way to proceed and - as I originally suggested - two stub types feeding into one category, for France-comics-creator-stub and Belgium-comics-creator-stub would be the correct move. Grutness...wha? 00:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• I must have explained myself very poorly. The parent categories are not, French, not Belgian, nor as such "subjectively perceived to be Franco-Belgian" by undersigned, but a genre irrelevant of nationality. Anyway, explaining and soliciting the blessing of this forum is more trouble than it's worth and obviously we survived fine before and will make do without in the future. Please be magnanimous in noting that the request is no longer at the table. MURGH ^disc. 21:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

• Agh. I withdrew the request for just the Franco-Belgian one. As above, I removed it. Not Euro. There was support for Euro was there not? MURGH ^disc. 00:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• I've re-propossed it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2007/November#Cat:European comics creator stubs .2F .7B.7BEuro-comics-creator-stub .7D.7D. Grutness...wha? 00:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• I'm sorry that it ended as a withdrawn request, though I understand. The idea of a Euro-comics-creator-stub (as originally suggested) is still a viable one, though, and is likely to be created at some point. Hopefully that will make it at least somewhat easier to find and categorise the stubs. Grutness...wha? 23:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

• Ah, that makes a little more sense. Still not too keen on it, but I can see the reasoning. As far as FB is concerned, though, US and UK are the only exceptions to the CountryName-x-stub system, since both terms are almost universally understood in English-speaking countries to mean the United States and United Kingdom. I doubt there would be many people in the English-speaking world who would instantly understand FB to mean France and Walloon Belgium. Grutness...wha? 00:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• seems I misunderstood again - see further up. Grutness...wha? 00:51, 1 November 2007 (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

This one is oversized so I propose the following

• Cat:Australian academic biography stubs / {{Australia-academic-bio-stub}}

also the following may be useful in the European subcat

• Cat:Italian academic biography stubs / {{Italy-academic-bio-stub}}

not sure these two will reach 60 so templates only for now cats if reach 60

• {{Netherlands-academic-bio-stub}}
• {{Poland-academic-bio-stub}}

not to sure on this one but

• Cat:Greek academic biography stubs / {{Greece-academic-bio-stub}} would be viable if it included the Ancient Greeks.

Waacstats 12:43, 26 October 2007 (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

Main category is at 121, I imagine we can find more than 60 stub articles among them.--Thomas.macmillan 20:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Support This was not far off when I last counted and given +400 articles in the rugby-union-bio-stub with Australia, New Zealand, Ireland and UK already split out I would certainly not be against a template for this (or France) and category if the figures pan out. Waacstats 22:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
• Support A Japie-stub SouthAfrica-rugbyunion-bio-stub sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Grutness...wha? 00:06, 26 October 2007 (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

This stub contains a mixtures of stubs for individual roads and of road transport-related articles. I propose that a stub is created for the latter grouping.--ReddyRose 17:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• {{road-transport-stub}} / Cat:road-transport-stub
• Which would have what likely population? Alai 18:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
• Mmm. I can see the use of this - it would act as a parent for things like car-stub, van-stub, etc... but much of what's in the road stubs section other than actual throughfares is probably undersorted, so I don't know that it would have much other population. It might also provide an idea as to what to do with the long poorly-names "water-stub" - change it to water-transport-stub. That way we can create a parent transport stub category and fix the niggling little hierarchy problems that transportation articles currently have. Grutness...wha? 23:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
• I have often wondered why there isn't a general {{transport-stub}}. How about {{road-transport-stub}} and {{water-transport-stub}}, both feeding into Cat:Transport stubs/Cat:Transportation stubs? Her Pegship (tis herself)

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 sf-convention-stub

Though {{sf-stub}} is hardly in desperate need of further splitting, with some 500 stubs, I note that over 80 of them are for science fiction conventions. A {{sf-convention-stub}} for these could be quite useful... Grutness...wha? 22:40, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

• Works for me, and it does sound quite differentially useful. Though perhaps on that basis, a somewhat wider-scoped "fandom" type instead (or as well)? Alai 03:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I wondered about that, but thought it might be a little vaguely defined. Whereas a convention is usually fairly clearly a convention, the boderline between fan activity and pro sf activity is a little more vague, especially when it comes to things like publications and organisations. For example, the organisation I know best, SFFANZ (of which, for my sins, I am a committee member) is a fan organisation, yet runs New Zealand's national sf awards (the Sir Julius Vogel Awards), which include both fan and pro categories. SFFANZ might qualify as a sf-fan-stub, but the SJV Awards are distinctly borderline. Grutness...wha? 05:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
    • As an activity SF awards are generally "fannish", regardess of who's on the receiving end. The utility of the distinction would be less to do with "fan vs. pro", as separating them out from stubs about miscellaneous fictional works (not to mention in-universe cruft). I'm certainly not going to claim it's without vagueness, but that's true of many a thing. In terms of permcat scoping, it'd map directly on to Cat:science fiction fandom (not that I'm suggesting a bot-trawl on that basis...). But I've no objections to the con type in and of itself. Alai 18:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
      • What about {{sf-event-stub}} or {{sf-org-stub}}? Covers a multitude more... Anything but sf-fandom-stub (what a dumping ground that would become...) Her Pegship (tis herself) 21:19, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
        • Just how much of a 'dumping ground' could it plausibly end up as, given that the permcat's at under 500, and this would necessarily be significantly narrower? (An unfiltered count of the permcat would imply around 120.) Alai 00:53, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
          • I was thinking of the editors who would tag everyone who's ever been in an sf film, tv series, or magazine with sf-fandom-stub. Not to mention the filkers, fanfic writers...the madness... :P Her Pegship (tis herself) 03:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
            • The first group would be cause for shooting the editors in question. But the latter group would be entirely suitable: isn't that preferable to leaving them tagged with sf-stub? (Assuming they pass notability muster, and are primarily notable for those things.) Alai 06:22, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
              • Wellllll...I've been tagging the latter with {{singer-songwriter-stub}} or {{sf-writer-stub}}. What about {{sf-culture-stub}}? (Although to some critics that might be an oxymoron...) Her Pegship (tis herself) 18:09, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
                • Which doesn't align to a permcat, and seems much vaguer in scope to me. Would it include the cons, or be a sibling? Is it in fact just "fandom" under a different name? If no-one is having "fandom" (with that name and scope), perhaps we should call it quits after the cons. Alai 04:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
    • A {{sf-event-stub}} would do rather than {{sf-convention-stub}} (though it might be worth making the latter as a redirect), and would have a slightly wider scope, too, allowing for things like Campbell Conference (science fiction). The idea of an {{sf-org-stub}} is a separate one, which might also be worthwhile, though I can't see very many stubs on the subject at a quick glance (a {{sf-magazine-stub}}, on the other hand, looks distincly viable). perhaps sticking with the convention/event one for now, and then see what's left? Grutness...wha? 22:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
      • Not so much things like the Campbell Conference, as the Campell Conference and nothing else (at least at present). There's no Cat:science function events permcat, this generally feels much too artificial as a "union cat" on conventions and conferences, and seems a bad bet as regards differential editing. "SF organisations" doesn't really cover conventions... in more ways than one. Alai 00:53, 14 October 2007 (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 Italian, not Euro-

The architects are on the margin of oversized again, although I've just fixed a lot of undersorting to the existing subcats, and I didn't even finish with the undersorted UK-architects. However, I think it's time for two new stubs: {{Euro-architect-stub}}/Cat:European architect stubs, and Template:Italy-architect-stub. CatScan is still down, but Cattersect shows 59 Italian architects; I'll propose Cat:Italian architect stubs too if we can dredge up a 60th. I worried a bit about the Euros eviscerating the rump category, but I think there are enough Canadians, Japanese, Australians, and so forth to keep things sane. —CComMack (t–c) 04:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

• Strong support for all of the above, except for the "regional template", which I suspect would do more harm than good in the medium term. Much prefer upmerged national templates. Alai 05:16, 2 October 2007 (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.