Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2010/May
May 21
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion 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 Rename. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No - don't panic, I'm just visiting :) This should - like all stub categories - be named in the singular as Category:Art movement stubs. Rename. Grutness...wha? 07:56, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.
May 17
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion 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 delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unpopulated because it is not practical stub type per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Gastropods/Guidelines#Stub_types. Replaceable with Gastropod-stub, Thiaridae-stub, Pleuroceridae-stub. --Snek01 (talk) 06:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as unused and replaceable.--Lenticel (talk) 01:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.
May 16
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion 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 delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:01, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category is malformed; unproposed; no permcat - Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:59, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- delete category, possibly upmerge template? Waacstats (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In keeping with the templates for other countries, the template should be renamed to {{Jamaica-rail-stub}} (see {{US-rail-stub}} or {{UK-rail-stub}}). The permcat is category:Rail transport in Jamaica. Since the perm category only has 19 articles, the stub category needs to be deleted. The template can upmerge to category:North America rail stubs. Dawynn (talk) 10:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It may be worth considering a Category:Caribbean rail stubs to take this and any rail stubs from other Caribbean island nations. Grutness...wha? 07:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In keeping with the templates for other countries, the template should be renamed to {{Jamaica-rail-stub}} (see {{US-rail-stub}} or {{UK-rail-stub}}). The permcat is category:Rail transport in Jamaica. Since the perm category only has 19 articles, the stub category needs to be deleted. The template can upmerge to category:North America rail stubs. Dawynn (talk) 10:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete due to lack of member articles (max was 19).--Lenticel (talk) 05:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.
May 14
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion 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 delete. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unproposed, scan suggests 24 stubs for this category. Double upmerge into Category:Egypt stubs and Category:African school stubs. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete category and upmerge template to 2 categories named. Waacstats (talk) 13:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Upmerge per nom. Lacks the neccessary 50 articles --Lenticel (talk) 02:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Query Are 50 articles required for a stub? The stub guidelines only mention 60 articles for NEW stub categories. Hugo999 (talk) 10:08, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.
May 13
[edit]{{carrom-sports-stub}}
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion 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 Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not used by any articles. Was provisionally kept at WP:WSS/D in August 2007, but has served no purpose in the intervening nearly-three years. There simply aren't enough, and it's highly unlikely there will ever be enough, carrom-related stub articles to support this. If kept, it should be renamed {{carrom-stub}}, since the present name makes no sense (it was copied from {{cue-sports-stub}}; "cue sports" is a well attested phrase, but "carrom sports" certainly isn't), and should upmerge to Category:Board game stubs, as it is not just an Indian game any longer, but played worldwide (it presently upmerges to Category:Indian sport stubs). — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 00:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as unused. Waacstats (talk) 13:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.
May 4
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion 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 upmerge; category is still at only 35 members at closing. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I propose removing this category and upmerging the template to Category:Sports video game stubs. After several searches, and reviewing all existing sports stub articles, we still only have 35 articles here. Dawynn (talk) 15:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: That would kinda defeat the purpose of having created this in the first place. There are dozens and dozens, at least, more potential articles to go in here (see bare beginnings of list of potential new cue sports VG stubs here). All it will take is one bored afternoon to double the number of such stubs. And things like this do tend to come in spurts, when some editor with a particular interest shows up and goes hog-wild. At any rate, this was put separate because the comparatively large number of such stubs (for such a narrow topic area as cue sports with so few active editors) was clouding up the cue sports stub category badly, while if they get dumped into the large, mixed sports VG stub category, they'll probably not get any attention, since such billiards simulator games are not "sexy" to most VG editors, and cue sports editors in a VG mood are not going to go digging through the general sports VG stub category looking for them. It is likely that there are already new[-ish] stubs in the sports VG stub category and maybe the overarching VG stub category that should be resorted into this one (i.e., the number is probably actually higher than 35). Anyway, I know this is a borderline case, so I'm not going to fight long and hard about it. Just saying it does no harm as-is, and may actually do some good. I know it's helped me, both in being able to find and work on non-VG cue sports stubs without having to wade through VG articles, and in starting to compile the list of missing cue sports VG articles (linked to above), among other things. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 00:22, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Couple notes -- Previous poster needs to review what's been going on. There is no longer a large mixed sports video game stub category. I've sorted it out. (Only 60 articles left under {{sports-videogame-stub}}) There is no longer a large mixed video game stub category. I've sorted it out. (Considering the breadth of the category, 113 articles under {{videogame-stub}} is pretty small) I've been trying to ensure that the video game stub categories are all reasonably sized, as the stub sorting project requests (60 - 800 articles). This remains a category that just isn't filling up with the existing articles. I understand the use of a template, and encourage keeping the template as a way of sorting these articles out. This has been suggested for deleting, because the article count just isn't there to justify a category. If it should stay a category, then let's find the articles that can fill it up. Dawynn (talk) 17:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Upmerge per nom. The number of stubs at the parent stub cat is too small for segregation to child stub cats--Lenticel (talk) 01:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.