On this WikiProject Stub sorting subpage, you can propose new stub types (please read the procedures beforehand!), as well as the reorganization and subdivision of existing stub types. You can also discuss anything else related to stubs on the talk page.
Proposing new stub types – procedure
Important: If you wish to propose the creation of a stub ARTICLE you've come to the wrong place. If you don't have a username yourself, please go to WP:AFC for proposing a new article. If you already have a username, you can create the article yourself. If you don't know how, add {{Helpme}} to your user talk page to request help from other editors. This page only deals with stub TEMPLATES and CATEGORIES; we cannot help you with creating articles.
Proposing new stub types
If you wish to propose a new stub category and template, please follow these procedures:
currently marked with another type of stub tag (in which case you should justify why your tag is better for the article than the current one);
a stub whose categorisation is highly ambiguous or questionable;
not marked as a stub.
If you use any category scan (from the tool mentioned above or from any other), please link to it so that other users can confirm that the results are still accurate.
Others may do the same, if they so desire.
5 days after listing it here, if there is general approval or no objection, go ahead and create the new category and/or template following the format on Wikipedia:Stub. List the new stub type on the stub types list in an appropriate section. If consensus is not clear, or discussion is still ongoing, the proposal will remain open until consensus can be reached.
If you wish to propose a stub type which does not currently have 60 articles that could use it, you may propose an upmerged template in a similar way. An upmerged template would feed into currently existing stub categories until such time that there are enough stubs for a separate stub category. At that point a category for it may be separately proposed. Some times, it may be difficult to be sure how many stubs would get a tag - in which case you can also start with an upmerged stub tag until you're sure there are enough.
DO NOT place a proposal here for any stub type which has already been created and is being discussed at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. The proposal page is only for stub types that have not yet been created, and it is better to keep any discussion of such stub types in one place rather than splitting it between different pages. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion is the correct page for proposals to delete a stub type.
^Good number means about 60 articles or more, or 30 or more if it is the primary stub type of a WikiProject, though this figure may vary from case to case.
"Speedy creation"
A stub type may be proposed for "speedy creation" if it meets one of the following criteria:
S1 - the creation of a category for which an approved upmerged template already exists and is now in use on more than 60 articles.
S2 - the creation of an upmerged national-level template for a subject in which other such national-level templates currently exist (e.g., X-bio-stub, X-hist-stub, or X-geo-stub, where X is the name of an internationally widely recognised country) or other instances where a clearly established pattern of similar subtypes exists. The proposed topic may not be controversial in scope. Many templates qualifying for S2 are listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/To do/To create.
List speedy creation proposals in the same proposal listings as normal stub proposals below.
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 created.
Excluding the British Columbia Coast river stubs, here are the results for possible sub-cats of the above, which I propose:
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Re-creation of Norway geography stub categories
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 re-create.
Good morning. As of January 2024, Norway has seen 7 counties reborn; three short-lived counties have been split. So it is time to re-create the following categories:
When all the corresponding categories have been re-populated, etc. then the categories corresponding to the split counties shall be deleted. Best, --Fadesga (talk) 13:55, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Stub category for Leiodidae stub, currently upmerging
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 discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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 discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Kursk Oblast geography stubs
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 created as revised.
Currently at 812 articles; I propose we create upmerged templates for each of its districts:
ETA: I've put in the article counts that I've been able to find, so I amend my proposal to create only templates for those with article counts. Her Pegship (?) 21:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No opposition, thus I will create templates & cats for these:
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Pyrausta (moth)-stub/Pyrausta (moth) stubs
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 proposed for renaming.
Calling all entomologists(?) - This is an awkward format for a stub template; I'm not sure the "(moth)" distinction is necessary in the template, though it seems fine in the category name. Before I propose {{pyrausta (moth)-stub}} for renaming to {{pyrausta-stub}}, does anyone here have an opinion? Thanks. Her Pegship (?) 18:39, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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:Bulbophyllum (Asia-Pacific clade) stubs has over 1,200 articles and no subcategories. Therefore, I propose the creation of these categories + their respective stub templates:
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Holocephali stubs
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 discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Batoidea stubs
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 discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
