Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Od Mishehu (talk | contribs) at 13:24, 2 September 2010 (→Instructions). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Shortcut
WikiProject Stub sorting
Information
Project page talk
- Stub types (sections) talk
- Stub types (full list) talk
- To do talk
- Naming conventions talk
- Redirects category talk
Wikipedia:Stub talk
Discussion
Proposals (A) talk
- Current month
Discussion talk
Criteria (A) (discontinued) talk
Deletion (Log) (discontinued) talk
Category

Template:Archive box collapsible This WP:WSS subpage is for discoveries of stub templates not cleared by WikiProject Stub sorting which have been encountered on Wikipedia. Stubs that have been put on the official stub type list without discussion on this page or /Proposals should be listed here as well. If you discover such a stub type, please list it at the top of this page along with any relevant details. Do not enter it on the stub type list until it has been discussed here to determine whether it should be kept or proposed for deletion at stub types for deletion.

Instructions

To check whether a stub type has been discussed in the past, click on either the template or category link and select "What links here" from the toolbox on the left (set it to find only items in the Wikipedia space). Find the link to a WikiProject Stub sorting page such as Deletion or Proposals to see if there has been any discussion on this type previously. Checking the template or category's history link may also indicate whether the stub type is p[art of a larger group discussion at WP:WSS/P. Note: If possible, check both the template and the category, in case one has been discussed but not the other.

If the stub category or template has not been proposed, and is not clearly an inappropriate or deletable type, list it here under a separate heading at the top of the list for the month of discovery. Please also consider notifying the creator of the stub type by subst'ing {{wssdnotify}} on their user talk page.

If a stub type is of a clearly inappropriate or deletable type, it may be taken straight to WP:SFD. Again, in this case, the creator of the stub type should be notified, this time by substing {{sfdnotify1}} (for one stub type) or {{sfdnotify2}} (for more than one stub type) onto their user talk page.

September 2010

Category:North East Scotland stubs

No direct stub template; however, it currently houses 3 upmerged stub templates, none of which are used enough to justify their own categories. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:26, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{Acanthizidae-stub}}/Category:Acanthizidae stubs

Created in 2008, currently 52 artiucles. I recommend keeping for now. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:54, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010

{{ClevelandNeighborhood}}

Currently transcluded on 11 pages. Doesn't have an associated category; places tagged pages in Category:Cleveland, Ohio (which is unhelpful, because most of them are already in a subcategory of that). —Paul A (talk) 03:33, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{China-lit-stub}}

I created this template (based on {{Japan-lit-stub}}) and populated the category before realising the extent of the bureaucratic process involved in stub sorting. Anyway, here it is, it has 32 articles so far, and will surely have many more as Wikipedia covers more than the basics of Chinese literature, which is an enormous field. Inductiveload (talk) 01:32, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Category:Sun stubs

No template. None of the project templates used. Only one article. Clearly the person who created this category is not familiar with this project. I'm not familiar enough with the subject of the one article to recommend where it should be placed. There is a Category:Star stubs that may be a better fit than a specific Category:Sun stubs (which would only cover articles related to one specific star). I would vote for deleting this category and migrating its article into Category:Astronomy stubs so someone with more familiarity with the subject could properly place the article. Dawynn (talk) 17:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Messages on user talk pages indicates category was built for template {{Stub-sun}}. This is a malnamed, incorrectly-formed template. Scrapping the discussion here, and starting one on the stub templates for deletion page. Dawynn (talk) 17:27, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010

{{Algeria-garden-stub}} / Category:Algerian garden stubs

Found this with just the template. No articles. There is no permanent category, so hard to tell how many articles could be listed here. I have no problem with the names, but would like to see this category populated, if it wants to stick around. Dawynn (talk) 14:56, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{AfroCaribbean-stub}} / Category:Afro Caribbean stubs

Found this with just the template. No articles. No indication of the intention for this category. I would choose deleting this category. Dawynn (talk) 11:58, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{English-engineer-stub}} / Category:English engineer stubs

Found this with one article listed in the underpopulated list. Started adding to it, when I found that there is already a well-populated Category:United Kingdom engineer stubs. The UK category is not really needing a split yet, so I would propose deleting this category and template altogether, and moving all articles over to {{UK-engineer-stub}}. Dawynn (talk) 10:37, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Had further thoughts on this. There is a Category:English engineers, so no reason that this one can't exist. I was able to find enough articles (I chose to stop after finding 60 -- there's several more). But, following convention, should the template be {{England-engineer-stub}}? Dawynn (talk) 11:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

{{TV-Production-Company-Stub}} / Category:Television production company stubs

Oops--I made this before I proposed it...anyway, I just created it and it is similar to the {{Film-company-stub}} but is used for television production companies rather than film companies. This may seem like a very small difference, but I thought it was worth creating. So far, after I created it, I have only added it to one page, but I would imagine there are several pages I would be able to add it to. If it gets deleted, it is understandable, but just wanted to give y'all a heads up before you discovered it yourselves. Sorry about this! --Donatrip (talk) 16:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

{{Samsung-mobile-stub}} / Category:Samsung phone stubs

Found this in Wikipedia:Database reports/Uncategorized categories. Currently has 101 articles. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although I'm not sure the articles should exist, while they do I would rather them be in this category than flooding another category. Waacstats (talk) 09:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{Canada-mag-stub}} / Category:Canada magazine stubs

Found this as I was reviewing the magazine categories again. There are 55 articles at this point, and I'm sure more could be found. I personally would argue that Category:Canadian magazine stubs would be a better category title. Dawynn (talk) 18:57, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

support rename. Waacstats (talk) 08:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:OCriverstub / Category:Orange County river stubs

Template not named properly, overall likely too small in scope. –xenotalk 19:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take to SFD and delete Waacstats (talk) 08:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

Category:African cycling biography stubs

Category created for {{Africa-cycling-bio-stub}}, {{SouthAfrica-cycling-bio-stub}} and {{Zimbabwe-cycling-bio-stub}}. Only 24 articles in the category, of which just under half have been prodded. SeveroTC 18:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think this could be deleted and the articles merged back into the cycling biogrpahy stub category. Waacstats (talk) 13:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please review: Upmerged template already existed ({{LGBT-mag-stub}}), found 60 articles to put under it, found that there was already a category Category:LGBT-related magazines. So, I created the stub category. Dawynn (talk) 13:28, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure the -related needs to be in there but seem to think that one of the other LGBT cats is the same. Waacstats (talk) 13:47, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I used related purely to keep with the parent category. Since Category:LGBT-related magazines, then Category:LGBT-related magazine stubs. Dawynn (talk) 13:12, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found these on the list of existing stubs that are on the "to be vetted" list. Please advise whether acceptable.

Biographies

Companies

Software

Dawynn (talk) 11:22, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can keep any category with over 50 articles and the upmerged templates, the rest could probably do with some one going through the categories and seeing what can get up close to 60 and deleting what can't. Waacstats (talk) 16:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010

Category:2010s indie pop album stubs

I found this one in the list of uncategorised categories, along with its associated template Template:Pop-album-stub (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). It appears to be an excessively narrow division of Category:Pop album stubs. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2009

Category:Bacon stubs

I didn't know that there had to be a discussion before a stub was created so I created this stub category yesterday. I was suggested by a "busybody" that I should inform you of its creation. I however believe that it is a very useful sub-category of meat stubs, with 23 entries included when I last checked and with the Bacon WikiCup already running it is very likely to serve a good purpose for a lot more stubs within the relevant range. (I've already added a lot of articles with no stub category to it and have changed the meat stubs template on a few articles to the more specific bacon stub category. Do with this template what you will (I understand now that it should've been proposed before it was created) but I stronly believe it will be a very helpful subcategory within the meat stubs category.--Sky Attacker the legend reborn... 04:11, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

23 is a very small number for a new stub category - the usual threshold before the creation of a category is 60 existing stubs. If this gets to 60 soon, then it may be worth keeping, if not, then the likely outcome is to upmerge the template to have it point to Category:Meat stubs. BTW, referring to someone who suggests you actually follow WP guidelines and policies as a "busybody" isn't going to gain you many friends! Grutness...wha? 23:41, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, the "busybody" comment was in humourous repsonse to this.--Sky Attacker the legend reborn... 00:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, the busybody in question referred to herself somewhat tongue-in-cheek that way initially (and is now going to stop referring to herself in the third person). LadyofShalott 06:53, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For more on-topic comment... I wonder about upmerging bacon-stub to something along the lines of pork-stub. Would that make the target number of 60? (I really am asking I don't know the answer to that.) LadyofShalott 06:55, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
{{Pork-stub}}/Category:Pork stubs would be a more widely-scoped stub type, and this suggests there would be over 60 articles. Best thing to do from here would be to take this to WP:SFD and mention this discussion there, asking that Category:Bacon stubs be deleted and the template upmerged into a new Category:Pork stubs, (with either the addition of a {{Pork-stub}} or the renaming of {{Bacon-stub}} to {{Pork-stub}}. Grutness...wha? 22:57, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'll take it to SFD now. Should be (hopefully) pretty straightforward. Taken o SFD for renaming/upscoping. Grutness...wha? 04:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Khmer singer stubs

Stub category that seems oddly named, not big enough, and it is used directly on articles and not with a template. Borgarde (talk) 00:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this one should probably go straight to SFD. You've mentioned several problems with it - another is that splitting singers by language is a bad precedent to have. Singers are usually split by nationality, and many singers can sing in multiple languages. A Cambodia-singer-stub would be fine (probably upmerged), but not this. Grutness...wha? 05:16, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Taken to SFD.Borgarde (talk) 07:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:South Ossetia geography stubs/{{South Ossetia-geo-stub}}

Unproposed, only one page in category, category is malformed. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 14:37, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template is misnamed too (should be at SouthOssetia-geo-stub). But if you check the SFD for Ossetia-geo-stub you'll see the reasoning behind it. It should have been proposed though - to save us the work of having to fix it up :/ Grutness...wha? 22:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:India-agri-stub

I noticed this one because it was using a non-standard category Category:Agriculture in India. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Newly discovered, November 2009

{{AIADMK-politician-stub}}/Category:AIADMK politician stubs and {{DMK-politician-stub}}/Category:Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam politician stubs

Two new stub types for Indian politicians, though only one of the four parts gives any indication of that by its name. Both categories are small, though one is fairly close to threshold - the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam one may need to be upmerged, however. And something - anything! -needs to be done with the names, even if only adding "-India-" to both templates and changing the DMK in the second template to something a little less ambiguous. Grutness...wha? 01:27, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is also relevant to any renaming which may be needed. Grutness...wha? 01:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quite honestly, when everything else in Wikipedia is create and then discuss/delete, I did not expect stub type creations to be any different. However, now that I know this, I'll bring the next few here before creating. At this point there are over 100 between 200-400 stubs each for these two stub types, they just haven't been categorized yet. Also, User:CarTick, User:Sodabottle and I expect to create at least another 100 each over the next two to four weeks for these two stub types. As far as the naming goes, I kept it consistent with {{INC-politician-stub}} and {{BJP-politician-stub}} which belong to the same Indian politician stub category. -SpacemanSpiff 01:54, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Check the section of WP:BOLD which relates to templates and categories. This will give you some reasons for the more circumspect nature of creation of stub types. More reasons can be found at User:Grutness/Stub rationales. As far as the nameing is concernedf, the BJP in particular is widely known wirldwide as being a major indian political party, as is the INC (though less so, perhaps). I doubt you'd have the same level of worldwide recognition for either DMK or AIADMK. Grutness...wha? 09:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
many of the politicians from Category:Tamil Nadu politicians will belong to either ADMK or DMK, two main political parties in Tamil Nadu. useful stub as far as I am concerned. --CarTick 05:20, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I never said that the aren't useful stub types. All I've said is that the names which have been used for the templates and one of the categories are non-standard, and if kept they will need to be changed; and that neither of the categories is yet up to the point where they should have been created. If they reach the threshold for stub categories (60 existing stubs), then only the names will be a problem. But these problems could have been overcome far more easily and with less work all round if the stub types had been proposed in the first place. Grutness...wha? 09:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And AIADMKazhagam-politician-stub? I could go with those, though I'm not sure about others in WP:WSS. Grutness...wha? 18:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt that such long an acronym would exist elsewhere, but I could live with {{AIADMKazhagam-politician-stub}}. While I understand the logic behind attaching India, the concern I have is that both these parties have a presence restricted to only Tamil Nadu and Puduchery, and they aren't "national" parties per se. But if it is preferred to make it {{India-DMK-politician-stub}} or {{DMKIndia-politician-stub}}, I haven't any objection to that either -SpacemanSpiff 18:46, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
India-DMK-politician-stub would be the other way to go (as in {{Australia-Labor-politician-stub}}, for example). As long as they're the only parties of those names in India, it would still make sense, whether they're regional or not. It's probably less urgent for these parties than for the Australian one and others like it, because as far as WP articles are concerned, DMK is the abbreviation for only one political party worldwide. It isn't impossible that there are others, thopugh, and it's certainly not an abbreviation that is likely to mean much to anyone who doesn't know about Indian politics. Grutness...wha? 23:12, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Discoveries&oldid=382470647"