Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive/2011/January

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting‎ | Proposals‎ | Archive‎ | 2011
(Redirected from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2011/January)

Proposals, January 2011

South American sculptor 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 create.
If I'm proposing painters, I should propose sculptors as well, I suppose.

Not sure there would be enough for a Category:South American sculptor stubs as yet, but that shouldn't be hard to make possible... --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:39, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

{{Africa-painter-stub}} and {{Africa-sculptor-stub}}

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.
Both feeding into the category Category:African artist stubs for the moment. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

South American painter 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 create.
As with composers - with a couple of rubs. I propose creating most of the following:

Six are already created, but they aren't used on many articles. Furthermore, Category:Brazilian painter stubs is underpopulated. Here's my thinking: if Category:Brazilian painter stubs is deleted for the moment, and depopulated, that combined with what is a.) currently stub-tagged and b.) what can potentially be stub-tagged (I know there will likely be enough) should be enough to populate Category:South American painter stubs. This should go some way towards codifying what exists.

Does this make sense? It kind of does in my head, but I'm not sure I'm translating it well. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:29, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me. I'd expect it would get pretty close to 60 stubs if the Brazilian ones are included, but the separate Brazil cat is unlikely to be viable any time soon. Grutness...wha? 23:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

South American composer stub templates

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 intend (and we all know what road is paved with those) to create a few more stubs on South American composers in the coming weeks. We already have a {{SouthAm-composer-stub}}, but I think it would be easier to break down the tags by individual countries. Thus:

None of them have nearly enough articles for a separate category of their own as yet, so all would feed into Category:South American composer stubs.

Any objections? I'm about to suggest the same with painters. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

Category:Swiss composer 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 create.
As below with Romania; there were a lot of untagged ones in the category, so this should now just squeak by. {{Switzerland-composer-stub}} is the parent, of course. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:01, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

As below with Romania; Support Waacstats (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Split of Category:Colombia 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 create.
Just oversized we already have started to split this by department templates and regional categories. I propose we finish this with the following:

Categories iff we have 60 articels to go in them otherwise upmerge to the parent category. Waacstats (talk) 16:23, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Support all. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:28, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Support all, though I'd suggest changing the name of one of those templates to {{MetaCO-geo-stub}} to avoid the potential for confusion. AFAIK there's nowhere else called Meta, but the term does have a lot of WP-specific meanings. Grutness...wha? 22:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Good spot, I had been looking out for other places and hadn't thought of that. Waacstats (talk) 13:14, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Split of Category:Sagaing Region 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 create.
Oversized category it looks like the next level down in vurna is the district this would lead to the following

I don't think any except the last one need any disambigs, but if someone could double check. Waacstats (talk) 12:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Support all --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Some will need dabbing. I note too that named districts in Burma/Myanmar use a capital D, so all the categories will need to be changed appropriately. I propose the following (slightly renamed) variants on the above:

Grutness...wha? 22:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree with those ammendments, It's a good job someone on here knows there stuff. Waacstats (talk) 13:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Split of Category:Punjab, Pakistan 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 create.
Pakisan Punjab is oversized but 2 upmerged templates have passed 60 and so the following two categories are viable

Any objections to speedy? Waacstats (talk) 11:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Support - none here. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:07, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Change those "districts" to "Districts" (capital D), and you've got my support, too! The other "district" categories need renaming... all the permcats and key articles capitalise the District. Grutness...wha? 22:49, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Capital D's sound good to me and yes I had based this on the existing district stub cats. Waacstats (talk) 13:16, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:British voice actor 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 create.
I'm sure that this will aid in cutting down the oft oversized Category:british actor stubs. Catscan suggests 75 articles plus. Waacstats (talk) 11:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Support speedy --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:07, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Romanian composer 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 create.
Should now be viable with just over 60 tagged with {{Romania-composer-stub}}. As usual, there were a lot in the general category that could take the stub tag but did not have it. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 07:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy' as I'm sure there is 1 or 2 precedants out there somewhere! Waacstats (talk) 11:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Lincolnshire railway station 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.
Apologies for not doing this first. Existing railway station stubs in Lincolnshire are allocated either to 'east midlands' or 'yorkshire & the humber', the current structure based on moribund english regions seems to have achieved little by way of reducing the number of stubs. Lincolnshire has an active project, and it makes sense to me to associate the articles more closely with the area people identify with than with discredited 1960s government pipedreams.

I have already found 41 members and have covered less than half of the historic routes. My plan was to build a list, then arm myself with some histories and work toward knocking them off.

I am also keen to have some sort of rational view of what is required for an article about a closed railway station. Thee amount of WP'ble info that exists for e.g. Braceborough_Spa_Halt_railway_station may well not exceed what is there already, and with the evidence of a stub list the Lincolnshire project would be free to decide that such articles may be complete enough.

Thus the stub list could be emptied in 2 or 3 years, which would be more useful than what is happening now.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 06:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest a tempalte upmerged to Category:Linolnshire stubs and whihcever of 'East midlands' and Yorkshire & humberside' it should really belong to till we get 60 then I see no reason not going for the category. Waacstats (talk) 11:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Comment Railway station stubs in England are presently broken down by region (which is not "a discredited 1960s government pipedream" but a legally-defined area in current usage). Ceremonial Lincolnshire (the area covered by Wikipedia:WikiProject Lincolnshire) is split between two regions because regional boundaries are drawn along post-1974 county boundaries; the present-day non-metropolitan county of Lincolnshire falls entirely within East Midlands (for which we have {{EastMidlands-railstation-stub}} and Category:East Midlands railway station stubs, with 332 members); to the north of the non-metropolitan county of Lincolnshire lie the unitary authorities North Lincolnshire and North East Lincolnshire, which between 1974 and 1996 were part of the County of Humberside, and so they are in Yorkshire and the Humber (for which we have {{Yorkshire-Humber-railstation-stub}} and Category:Yorkshire and the Humber railway station stubs, with 474 members). See also WP:UKCOUNTIES.
Prior to the creation on 27 January 2011 of {{Lincolnshire-railstation-stub}} (and Category:Lincolnshire railway station stubs which presently has 41 members), the only existing subdivisions of any of these regions were: {{GreaterManchester-railstation-stub}} (Category:Greater Manchester railway station stubs presently has 208 members); {{Merseyside-railstation-stub}} (Category:Merseyside railway station stubs presently has 91 members); {{Kent-railstation-stub}} (Category:Kent railway station stubs presently has 84 members).
There is no present Category:Linolnshire stubs (or even Category:Lincolnshire stubs) to which these could be upmerged. The best would be Category:Lincolnshire building and structure stubs (already populated by {{Lincolnshire-struct-stub}}. But even if this is done, the articles so tagged should still be reachable through the tree rooted at Category:United Kingdom railway station stubs. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:53, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I must say that I( tend to agree with Redrose's comments. Robert, I suggest that this is yet another case where assessment templates make far more sense than stub templates (as explained at WP:STUB#Stub types, WikiProjects, and Assessment templates. A general {{Lincolnshire-stub}}/Category:Lincolnshire stubs would certainly make sense, though. Grutness...wha? 18:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Panpulmonata 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 create.
This is a new taxonomic classification as of last year for the Heterobranchia. Proposing this as a parent-only category that will pull in Category:Stylommatophora stubs, Category:Systellommatophora stubs, and {[cl|Planorbidae stubs}} as well as most of the templates currently found under Category:Heterobranchia stubs. Dawynn (talk) 14:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Support. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Ahmadiyya 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 create.
oops! I didn't realize that we had to propose the creation of stubs beforehand. So it's already created but I think I should still put here.

Peaceworld111 (talk) 21:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

  • No objection to the template, but it looks like there will be serious problems in this getting to the required 60-stub threshold... the category may need to be upmerged. Grutness...wha? 21:52, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Support template - could be useful. I don't think the category will be just yet, though. ---Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Spider stubs templates

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.
Propose building the following templates to upmerge to the spiders for now:

Dawynn (talk) 13:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Split of Category:Heterobranchia 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 create.
Time to breakdown yet another overlarge category. As I did with the Category:Caenogastropoda stubs, so I would like to do here. I'd like to use parent-only subcategories for further sorting. All tagging will either be at the Heterobranchia level (for smaller families), or at the family level. I propose the following splits at this time:

Dawynn (talk) 13:08, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:05, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Further review showed that Opisthobranchia and Pulmonata are no longer supported under the 2010 taxonomy scheme. These will not be created. Dawynn (talk) 14:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Cetacean 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 create.
I propose creating Category:Cetacean stubs - we now have 45 articles tagged as {{paleo-whale-stub}} and 19 as {{whale-stub}}, giving a total of 64 articles for this category. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:05, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

More Category:Caenogastropoda stubs splits

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.
Just a few more of these.

Will clear 51 more articles out of Category:Caenogastropoda stubs. Dawynn (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Support. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Support templates and I asume you mean they will clear articles from {{Caenogastropoda-stub}}. Waacstats (talk) 12:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Actually, moving them into the family templates will allow moves into the parent-only subcategories of Category:Caenogastropoda stubs. Thus, it removes them from both the template and the category. Dawynn (talk) 12:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

More Category:Hypsogastropoda 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 create.
These will be pulled from Category:Caenogastropoda stubs for upmerge to Category:Hypsogastropoda stubs:

This will move a total of 91 articles into these family-level templates. Dawynn (talk) 13:20, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:17, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Canadian Internet Company Stub

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 do not create.
There is no Canadian Internet Company Stub, although there is a US Internet Company Stub, per:

{{US-internet-company-stub}}

I have seen some instances where Canadian technology companies in general, including Internet companies have been falsely tagged as US Company stubs. If there is a US Internet Company stub, then, presumably, there should be for other countries too where there is a significant technology sector. (How many technology related sectors does Wikipedia recognize?)
Enquire (talk) 07:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

If you see any falsely tagged with a US-related stub, then simply change them to {{Canada-company-stub}}. Yes, a {{Canada-internet-company-stub}} might be worthwhile, and I don't think anyone here would oppose the creation of one, but it's not really dependent on the size of the technology sector - what's more important is the number of stubs which exist which are likely to use the template and how significantly it will reduce the usage of other templates. If there are 1000 internet companies in Canada but only ojne of them has a stub article, there's little point in making the templ,ate - if there are a considerable number, though, it would be worthwhile. How many Canadian internet companies are there with stub articles, approximately? Grutness...wha? 07:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

split of Category:British actor 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 create.
Oversized (for now) sorting will reduce it but as we already have Scottish and English I think the following will be of use

categories only if we have at least 60.Waacstats (talk) 22:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:18, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Caribbean artist 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 create.
Propose speedy creation of category. To pick up {{Caribbean-artist-stub}}, as well as the following:

Dawynn (talk) 19:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Support speedy. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 20:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Split of Category:Arachnid 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 create.
The arachnids have grown too large. I'll propose a split of a couple groups for now:

Support (though I'd rather split 'em with an axe.) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Support, but watch the spelling :) Grutness...wha? 21:56, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Egyptologist 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 create.
I propose Category:Egyptologist stubs, as a stub category for the permcat Category:Egyptologists - scan shows 98 stubs here. {{Egyptologist-stub}} is a good template for it. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:20, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

More gastropod families

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.
Propose restoring the following from template redirects to full templates:

Propose new templates / categories for the following families:

Dawynn (talk) 03:36, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Support all --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:25, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

African scientist stub tags by country

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 propose the following stub tags, all upmerged to the national people stub category and Category:African scientist stubs:

These are all based on this scan, which would populate Category:African scientist stubs by a total of just over 100 articles. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 20:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Support all. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 22:57, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

{{Cocculiniformia-stub}}

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.
Proposal for a template for this clade under Category:Gastropod stubs. I don't believe that there are enough articles for now to justify a category, but would like to separate these from the general gastropod template. Dawynn (talk) 13:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

Category:Social scientist 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 create.
I propose creating this category, as a stub category for Category:Social scientists. This category will be populated by already existing stub categories (e.g Category:Anthropologist stubs), and possibly new categories or upmerged stub tags for permcats which don't yet have stub categories (any such new stub tags or categories willbe proposed first). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:29, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

Category:Neritimorpha stubs / {{Neritimorpha 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 create.
This is yet another split from the formerly oversized Category:Gastropod stubs. This would pick up the following, as well as others currently tagged simply as gastropod stubs:

As part of this proposal the three templates listed above will be raised to full template status (as opposed to redirects to {{Gastropod-stub}}. Dawynn (talk) 13:11, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

Further split of Category:Caenogastropoda 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 create.
Proposing a further split of the Caenogastropoda, using the same major splits as the main category (Category:Caenogastropoda):

Dawynn (talk) 11:51, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I was overlooking some things. The Architaenioglossa category would also pick up {{Ampullariidae-stub}}, {{Viviparidae-stub}}, and Category:Diplommatinidae stubs. So, a category is justified. Dawynn (talk) 12:32, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
In order to cut down on cross project fighting, I'm choosing to make these parent-only stub categories for now. The mollusc / gastropod projects have indicated that they would rather not stub at any levels outside of families. By creating parent-only categories, we can keep our categories to a minimum, while allowing them to keep stubbing just at family-level. Dawynn (talk) 03:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

European television 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 create.
Making a start here, will be back with a few more as the process goes on. 690 articles in Category:European television stubs with some big countries not having their own stubs, and some upmerged templates above threshold.

Categories with new worthwhile upmerged (for now) templates
New templates with categories if 60 threshold is met

Next I will look at television station stubs. SeveroTC 18:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC) - updated 08:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC) & 14:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

Split of Category:Cephalopod 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 create.
I know this doesn't need to be split, but found it while I was exploring outward from the gastropods.

Dawynn (talk) 15:01, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Support. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Cerithiopsidae 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 create.
New template: {{Cerithiopsidae-stub}}. To be carved out of the Category:Gastropod stubs. Cat scan indicates 70 articles. Dawynn (talk) 12:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Support. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Puerto Rico Road 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 create.
I propose to create {{PuertoRico-road-stub}} and Category:Puerto Rico road stubs which will feed into Category:United States road stubs and Category:Puerto Rico stubs. --Admrboltz (talk) 03:53, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

  • Support - Sounds appropriate. PR has a lot of road stubs. Dough4872 04:02, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
    • There are just over 60. --Admrboltz (talk) 04:29, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Support. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
  • No Support. There is a significant number of PR roads articles that are pass Stub class and have not been reclassified as Start or beyond. Once that's done, I could give my support. Mercy11 (talk) 14:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
    • Its also being proposed as currently PR Stubs use {{US-road-stub}} and unlike every other state, and the VI, does not have a "state detail" template. --Admrboltz (talk) 23:36, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Support - it should also feed into any appropriate Caribbean categories. Mercy11, Start-Class articles may still be stubs - there is not a strict 1:1 correlation between stub articles and Stub-Class articles, since one is assessed per editing by Wikipedia as a whole and one per the requirements of a specific WikiProject. Grutness...wha? 22:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Support for all of the reasons given above. Imzadi 1979 → 23:28, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Polish motorcycle speedway competition 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 create.
Hopefully the final speedway category I bring here! Speediable Category:Polish motorcycle speedway competition stubs and {{Poland-motorcycle-speedway-competition-stub}} - 128. SeveroTC 18:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Support. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Templates for Category:Caenogastropoda 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 create.
OK -- this is one of the weirder things I've run into. There are a number of redirected stub template pages that I originally found under Category:Gastropod stubs. The ones I've listed here, I have moved under the Category:Caenogastropoda stubs, and am asking permission to raise these back up to a level of true templates:

Dawynn (talk) 15:05, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Support. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:29, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Finnish composer 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 create.
I've just tagged a few things with {{Finland-composer-stub}} - there should be 62 or 63 to support the new category. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:00, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Support speedy. Dawynn (talk) 10:41, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Support♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:07, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

Category:Patellogastropoda 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 create.
Template: {{Patellogastropoda-stub}}. According to cat scan, would pick up Category:Lottiidae stubs and Category:Patellidae stubs, as well as at least 80 articles from the overlatge Category:Gastropod stubs. Dawynn (talk) 16:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:59, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

{{Yadgir-geo-stub}}

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.
Proposing a speedy creation for this geography template for this relatively new district in Karnataka. This will upmerge to Category:Gulbarga district geography stubs for now. Dawynn (talk) 02:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

My apologies. I should have included a link for Yadgir district. Dawynn (talk) 11:40, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Support template. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:38, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Airsoft stub

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 do not create.
Category:Airsoft

About 13 stubs that don't have any real classification because they aren't firearms and using the "technology" stub is the only one that fits. If we could have an airsoft one it could help.

  • An upmerged template might be useful, but there are too few stubs for a separate category. Porblem is, where would we upmerge it to? Any suggestions, anyone? Grutness...wha? 04:43, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
    • Hm... Is there a section for extreme sports? Or shooting sports? What is paintball listed under? TheFSAviator ( T • C ) 22:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Good point, we don't have one for extreme sports, though that's a pretty amorphous category with everything from paintball to bungy to paragliding... There'd probably be enough stubs for a category, and certainly a template - possibly {{extreme-sport-stub}} - though how to define it might be a problem. Grutness...wha? 21:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Split of Category:Gastropod 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 create.
In the spirit of Category:Heterobranchia stubs, I'd like to propose the following:

Building templates with these categories will allow us to move articles that may have families too small to even bother with templates at the family level. Ultimately, this should allow us to bring the Gastropods down to a reasonable level. Dawynn (talk) 17:13, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Support stub-sorting. Oppose gastropods. (Yecch.) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 14:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

further subcategorize Croatia 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 create.
We now already have stub templates for each of the 21 Counties of Croatia, but 4 categories within Category:Croatia geography stubs. Does anyone mind if I split them up? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Support - I don't mind in the least. :-) --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:57, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Support any that reach the 60-stub threshold - it's possible that there are still some smaller ones which should stay upmerged... Grutness...wha? 21:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Here's the statistic - now updated after sorting --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:25, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Most meet the speedy criteria already, there is potential for other immediate upgrades (237+91 are still left in generic categories), and it should all be done purely for the sake of consistency anyway. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 23:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Only five/six are at or below the limit. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:25, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone actually object to the remaining subcategorization? To summarize, it's 40, 49, 51, 58, 61, 61. The worst case has a total of 214 settlements so other than consistency there's also potential. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
The 40's a bit thin... I'd certainly say the 58's close enough, though. See if we can hunt out with a few more for the three smallest ones. Grutness...wha? 04:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
It would feel inane to leave out just the three smallest ones without their own category, yet practically with their own category because they'll be the only ones left in their upper category. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Shrug, I evened it all out. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 23:04, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
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.

Split of overlarge Category:Heterobranchia 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 create.
I'd like to propose some new templates and categories for the Heterobranchia. In accordance with the Gastropod project, these are all at the family level.

Categories to be built, only if 60 articles can be found. Dawynn (talk) 15:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Support all --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

New division level splits for Category:Karnataka 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 create.
Based on this discusion, I'd like to propose the following Division level splits. Per the discussion, there will be no division templates:

I will point out that the indicated discussion is from 2007, and only one of the divisions have been created so far. Further, although a category exists for Mysore, none of its districts have been moved under it. Is this just a matter where the work hasn't been completed? Or has there been a change in thinking of how the Indian states should be split? Dawynn (talk) 16:27, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Looks like a good idea and we delete the small categories and upmerge the templates. Waacstats (talk) 13:18, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Somebody saw where I was driving to. Yes -- I want the divisions in place before we upmerge the small categories. Dawynn (talk) 15:18, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:European newspaper stubs templates

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.
Looks like the following are missing and worth speedying:

Dawynn (talk) 19:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Support all. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 22:30, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Women's association football biography stubs split

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.
Looking to break two categories out of this. Templates already created and loaded, just need to decide on the category names.

Dawynn (talk) 16:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:17, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category: Ibis-related 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 do not create.
We have some for other birds already, so why not? (75.189.148.4 (talk) 16:50, 11 January 2011 (UTC))

Birds are divided by order - Ibises are covered by {{Ciconiiformes-stub}} - which is only marginally large enough for its own stub category. In any case, the permanent category for ibises (Category:Threskiornithidae) only has about 40 articles, so even if all of them were stubs there wouldn't be enough for a separate stub category. Grutness...wha? 22:41, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Split of Category:United States organization 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 create as revised.

Oversized. Would love to propose many more, but I can't find any good ones. Open to suggestions.~Gosox(55)(55) 22:57, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Support all. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
    • Wouldn't charities come under US-philanthropic-org-stubs, I asssume the US-trade-org-stub is for organisations linking people of the same trade i.e lawyers assoc. etc but could possibly do with another name so not to confuse with trade-union-stubs otherwise everything seems OK. Waacstats (talk) 23:04, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
      • Good point about the trade ones (and you're right about what I was intending with them)... as for the charity ones, {{US-philanthropy-org-stub}} would be the name - and already seems to exist (the generic parent used to be at charity-org-stub, but seems to have been moved at some point to philanthropy-org-stub... a redirect at {{US-charity-org-stub}} is probably worthwhile) Grutness...wha? 09:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Category:Irish poet 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 create.
I've been a-sorting with {{Ireland-poet-stub}}; this should pass the threshhold with a couple over 60. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

Split of Category:R&B song 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 create.
725+ in cat and growing.

~Gosox(55)(55) 13:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Support and with there being over 50 articles already in the 1950s I would support a category if the fine sorting finds a few more. Waacstats (talk)
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.

Welsh organisations

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 may be only about 400 stubs in Category:Wales stubs, but about a quarter of them seem to be organisations. a {{Wales-org-stub}} and accompanyine Category:Welsh organisation stubs would be fairly useful, methinks. Grutness...wha? 03:59, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Support --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Support and looking at UK-orgs the organisations could de with an overhaul of the category structure - Scottish schools being a sub cat of scottish orgs but UK schools not a subcat of UK orgs etc will have to add to the to do list. Waacstats (talk) 13:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
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.

Split Category:San Joaquin Valley 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 relisted.

There are a number of features that are in this county and are not in the San Joaquin Valley. Sequoia National Park and parts of Kings Canyon National Parks are certainly not in the valley. Currently 62 articles us the template {{TulareCountyCA-geo-stub}}.

Category:Tulare County geography stubs
This is an archive page. It hasn't been January for quite some time! I'll move your request to the current month. Grutness...wha? 00:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC).
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/Archive/2011/January&oldid=1138356761"