Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Administrator instructions

Before proposing or creating a new type of stub, please read How to propose a new stub type.
Skip to Table of Contents. Skip to table of contents · Skip to current discussions · Purge this page

If this is your first encounter with stub sorting, we recommend that you read about the nature of stub sorters before diving into a discussion.

Shortcut:
WP:SFD
Deletion discussions
Wikipedia deletion policy
Tools

Process – Log – Guide
– Images – Admins

This page only deals with the deletion and renaming of stub types, which consist of a template and a category, and are intended to be used for sorting stubs. Stub templates that are missing categories and stub categories without associated templates are also appropriate here. All other templates or categories nominated for deletion or renaming have to be put on Templates for discussion or Categories for discussion, respectively.

Contents


WikiProject Stub sorting
 v • d • e 
Puzzle stub cropped.png
Information
Project page talk
- Stub types (sections) talk
- Stub types (full list) talk
- To do talk
- Naming conventions talk
- Stub redirects talk
Wikipedia:Stub talk
Discussion
Criteria (A) talk
Proposals (A) talk
Discoveries (A) talk
Deletion (Log) talk
Category

[edit] About this page

This page is for the proposal, discussion, and voting on deletion or renaming of stub categories, stub templates, and stub redirects. Centralizing the vote on these three closely related matters on one page reduces the need for repeating identical arguments on several different Wikipedia deletion pages (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion, Wikipedia:Templates for discussion, and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion) and also reduces the workload on those pages.

This page is still named "Stub types for deletion" for two reasons. Firstly, many of the stub types brought here arrive here after rudimentary discussion has already taken place at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries. Secondly, renaming automatically implies some form of deletion. The renaming of a stub category leads to the replacement and deletion of the older category, and the renaming of a stub template usually (but not always) leads to the deletion of the previous template name, as stub template redirects are rarely used (for the reasons for this, see the stub naming conventions).

[edit] Putting a stub type on Stub types for deletion (SfD), and what happens afterwards

  • Mark the affected pages:
    • For deletion:
      • Put {{sfd-t}} on stub templates
      • Put {{sfd-c}} on stub categories
      • Put {{sfd-r}} on stub redirects, and include the redirect target after it (see below for details)
    • For renaming:
      • Put {{sfr-t|New-name}} (parameter optional) on stub templates
      • Put {{sfr-c|New name}} (parameter optional) on stub categories
      • Put {{sfr-r|New name}} (parameter optional) on stub redirects (Redirects should be nominated for renaming only as part of a mass renaming that includes templates that share the name element to be renamed that the redirect uses.)
  • List the stub type below in a new subsection at the top of the section which has the current date. If that section does not yet exist, create it.
    • Mention all affected pages in the subheading, like this:
      ==== {{tl|banana stub}} / [[:Category:Banana stubs]] / {{tl|YellowCurvyFruit-stub}} (redirect) ====
    • Also mention how many articles currently use the template, and if it is listed anywhere else.
    • Of course, state your reason for nominating the stub type!
  • It is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors to the stub that you are nominating the stub. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the stub. Some standard pre-formed notices are {{sfdnotify1}}, {{sfdnotify2}}, or {{sfd-notice}}.
  • After a voting period of seven days, action will be taken if there is consensus on the fate of the stub type. Please do not act before this period is over.
  • Archived discussions are logged here, and are marked with {{sfd top}} and {{sfd bottom}}, indicating whether category and template were renamed, deleted, or no action taken.

[edit] Putting {{sfd-r}} or {{sfr-r}} on redirects

Given that the {{sfd-r}} and {{sfr-r}} templates break redirection, it is necessary to change a stub redirect when adding the template, as follows:

#Redirect [[Template:Example-stub]] should be changed to:

{{sfd-r}}{{Example-stub}}

[edit] Possible reasons for the deletion of a stub type

  • It is not used in any article, and its category is empty.
  • It overlaps with other stub types, or duplicates them outright.
  • Its scope is too limited - As a rule of thumb, there should be at least 50 existing appropriate stub articles, 30 if there is a specific associated WikiProject.
  • Its scope is too ambiguous or vague - in these cases, renaming may be more appropriate than outright deletion.
  • The stub category or template is misnamed. In this case, make this clear when nominating and propose a new category or template name. Note that - in the case of a template but not a category - it may be more appropriate to make it into a redirect.
  • They are malformed, misnamed, or deprecated redirects. See the stub naming guidelines for details on how stubs are named.

[edit] What this page is not for

[edit] Typical opinion options

  • Keep (do not delete or modify)
  • Delete (delete template and category)
  • Merge with xx-stub (delete category, keep template (either as redirect to, or feeding into the same category as, xx-stub))
  • Merge with xx-stub without redirect (delete category and template, put xx-stub on all articles that use it)
  • Upmerge (merge to parent stub type, typically by keeping the template but redirecting it to the parent stub category for potential re-splitting later)
  • Change scope (reword the template, typically giving it either a larger or more precise scope. Usually also means renaming the category)

When expressing an opinion, please try to give a more substantial reason than simply "I like it/find it useful" or "I dislike it/don't find it useful".

[edit] Renaming options

  • Rename/Support
    • (for templates: move to new name, replace existing usages, delete redirect);
    • (for categories: recreate category page under new name, repopulate, delete old category).
  • Rename, keep redirect/Move (for templates only: move, but don't replace usages of existing template)
  • Oppose (no move of template, and/or deletion and recreation of category)
  • DO NOT rename any stub type that has been nominated here while discussion is still in progress. Any necessary renaming will be done when the discussion is closed.
  • If you wish to argue for the deletion of a template or category nominated for renaming, please re-tag with {{sfd-t}}/{{sfd-c}}, and note the date of doing so, so as to ensure proper consideration of this new nomination.

If a template is speedily renamed, similarly re-tag the resultant redirect if deletion of that is desired.

[edit] Note to non-administrators

If a category and/or stub deletion is agreed upon and you're helping to change the stubs on those pages: Once you've emptied the category, please note the category on this page under the "To Delete" section that the stub category section is empty ("orphaned") and "ready to be deleted" to the administrators.

[edit] Listings

[edit] October 28

[edit] {{Orissa-geo-stub}} / Cat:Orissa geography stubs

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 close for the time being. The renaming of the state appears to be under consideration rather than finalised. A new SfD nomination should be opened if the new name is accepted and becomes widely used.


State's name has officially changed to Odisha. Template and category should be renamed to Template:Odisha-geo-stub and Cat:Odisha geography stubs to match. Propose keeping current template name as a redirect. Grutness...wha? 00:00, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Rename and keep direct per nomination. I'll move the main article (Orissa) to correspond with the name change. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Well, the main article has been move-protected for a few days now, which I disagree with, but in any case...I can't move the page. Regardless, I still believe the stubcat and template should be renamed. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
  • That's interesting... When I nominated this, the page was at Odisha. Going by the page history and equivalent CfD it looks as if the naming hasn't been officially finalised yet, so perhaps this should be postponed for now... I'll withdraw the nom (temporarily, at least). Grutness...wha? 23:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] Cat:Observatory stubs

Rename to Cat:Astronomical observatory stubs to match permcat. Grutness...wha? 00:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Old business

Everything from here on down is old business; the current 7-day review period has ended. Everything from this point on should be dealt with and removed from the workflow. Move this marker up as time passes.

[edit] October 5

[edit] {{Tatar-writer-stub}}

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 and redirect to Template:Russia-writer-stub. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 01:02, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


Unproposed, with redlinked category,. If it had been proposed, it would undoubtedly have been firmly rejected asa n idea - we have deleted similar stubs based on Tatarstan in the past, for the same reason that stubs are not made for other similar regions. Not generally helpful as a stub type (and decidedly unhelpful as a precedent). Delete. Grutness...wha? 00:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't understand why do you want to delete this stub. There are many Tatar writers and they need stub. --YildizTat (talk) 13:29, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
In simple terms, Bio-stubs are divided by currently recognised country and current national boundaries except in very rare circumstances. Tatarstan is currently part of Russia - as such, {{Russia-writer-stub}} should be used. It's exactly the same reason why we don't, for instance, have {{Thrace-writer-stub}}, {{Kurdistan-writer-stub}}, {{Texas-writer-stub}}, {{Kashmir-writer-stub}}, {{Bavaria-writer-stub}}, or {{Chechnya-writer-stub}} - to give just a handful of examples. Even if we were to have such a stub, it would be at Tatarstan-writer-stub, not Tatar-writer-stub. In Tatarstan's case, it's further confused by the ambiguity of whether it refers to people from Tatarstan or people of Tatar descent. If it's the latter, we again - except in very, very rare circumstances - don't divide bio-stubs by ancestry. See also the similar debates forther down this page for Cat:Bosniak people stubs and {{Livonia-bio-stub}}. Grutness...wha? 00:29, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but Russian is understanding as nationality too. And many tatar writers lives and lived not only in Russia, so template Russian writers is not acceptable for them. Tatars are second nation in Russia with rich culture and literature, and you say, that we can't have our own template??? Russia is very big country with many different cultures and only one template for all of nations is a big mastake! I repeat, that Tatars live in all world, not only in Russia. --YildizTat (talk) 10:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
The difference is that Russia is not part of a country - it is a currently internationally recognised country. For the same reason writers in each of the other entities I mentioned above use the currently internationally accepted countries that they are within - a Kurdish writer living in Iraq would be marked with an Iraq-writer-stub, for instance. Grutness...wha? 23:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I have to agree with Grutness, splitting by subnational entity is not a great idea, and I think all the ones we have were unproposed, this one is as awkward as any other, is some one who is from Tatarstan but writes Russian literiture a Tatar writer, if so why is someone from US a Tatar writer if not why not he lives there. Waacstats (talk) 21:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

But can't there be one stub for all Tatar writers, which can unite all of them?--94.180.162.57 (talk) 08:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Stub types aren't intended to be used to unite people by ethnic origin - permanent categories already do that, as would a talk-page assessment template if there were a relevant WikiProject. Grutness...wha? 00:16, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Addendum: Cat:Tatar writer stubs - created since the template was nominated for deletion - is now also included in this nomination. Further note that even if every one of the 29 articles in Cat:Tatar writers were a stub (which is not the case - only some eleven are of stub size), it would fall short of the required threshold for a separate category by a considerable distance. Indeed, some of the articles which had been added to the stub category were not stubs. Grutness...wha? 00:34, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't new that. If it's so necessary, delete it.--YildizTat (talk) 11:29, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete, following geography is the only really clear way to divide these stubs, so we need to be consistent. Nyttend (talk) 12:52, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] {{NRO-stub}}/Cat:National Reconnaissance Office stubs

Unproposed, and with a distinctly ambiguous name. The stbcat is not attached anywhere to the stub category tree. Used on 17 articles, all but one of which are actually bio-stubs (the remaining one should probably have listdev rather than a stub template). The associated permcat has fewer than 50 articles in total (including its subcat), so there's no chance of this having 60 current stubs. Upmerge would be an option if (a) the template had been named correctly and (b) it was actually used for things which should be using it rather than bio-stubs. As it is, it seems less than useful even as a redirect. Delete. Grutness...wha? 00:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Send to SFD and delete. Waacstats (talk) 21:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Oops already on SFD - therefore Delete. Waacstats (talk) 21:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. Most of the articles in this stubcat should be re-tagged as bio-stubs; the ambiguous name also leads me to support deletion. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 02:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] {{WightmanCup-stub}} / Cat:Wightman Cup stubs

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


Unproposed stub type for a tennis tournament. Currently used on two articles, and the associated permcat only has fifteen articles in total - even if all of them were stubs (which they aren't) it would only get 25% of the way to being viable as a separate stub category. Probably not even that useful as an upmerged template - Cat:Tennis competition stubs is fairly large, but splitting it by decade or era would probably make more sense. Delete. Grutness...wha? 00:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

send to SFD and delete, will look at some other way to split tennis comp stubs. Waacstats (talk) 21:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Oops already on SFD - therefore Delete. Waacstats (talk) 21:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Need more coffee? :) As to other ways of splitting, a GrandSlam-tennis-stub to cover the four majors might help things out, though i still think a by-decade split might help more. That is a discussion for WSS/P, though. Grutness...wha? 23:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] September 24

[edit] Cat:Anxiolytic stubs

Underpopulated (only 28 pages). Scan shows only a few more. Upmerge. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:22, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Upmege until someone creates another 30 or so. Waacstats (talk) 13:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Upmerge Scope is too limited. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] September 22

[edit] Cat:Jewish theologian stubs

An intersection of Cat:Judaism stubs and Cat:Theologian stubs. This intersection appears to only contain 4 articles. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Delete - and delete the template as well. Not only is it poorly named, but it is highly misleading if it is intended to be an intersection of Judaism stubs and theologian stubs - the template states that it is for Jewish theologians - i.e., for theologians whose religious persuasion is Jewish, irrespective of whether their specialist area of research is Judaism or not. The category states that it is for articles related to jewish theology (a redirect to Jewish philosophy). Given that it is more than likely that some Jewish theologians - template definition - are concerned with other religious studies rather than Jewish theology - category definition - in the same way, for example, as there are Christians who are experts on Buddhism, the whole nature of the purpose for this stub type is pretty unclear. In any case, the topic is pretty thoroughly covered by {{Judaism-bio-stub}} - a stub type which seems, BTW, to be being fairly thoroughly misused to apply to any Jewish biography, whether the person whose article is marked with this template is notable for their religious work or not (why, for instance, are Sigmund Livingston, Henri Bernstein, Wilhelm Salomon Freund, and Jeff Ballabon marked with that stub? The various reli-bio-stub types - including this one -are for people whose main claim to fame is their religious work, not for people who simply happen to be of one particular faith) Grutness...wha? 11:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete A category of stubs about theologians specializing in Judaism is one thing. But theologians who just so happen to be Jewish is another entirely. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cat:Chinese biologist stubs

An intersection of Cat:Biologist stubs and Cat:Chinese scientist stubs, which doesn't seem to have that many stubs. Double upmerge. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:36, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Double upmerge per nom unless this can be brought up to 60 stubs. Cat Scan suggests that there are only eight likely candidates at the moment. Grutness...wha? 11:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] September 1

[edit] {{PL-stub}} / {{Prog-lang-stub}}

Unproposed stub which defies the naming conventions for stub templates. PL could stand for any of dozens of things, of which Poland would seem the most likely by some distance. It is, however, for computer programming language. The template certainly seems useful enough, and its associated category (which also needs renaming from the plural to the singular as Cat:Programming language topic stubs) is full enough. Rename, but do not keep the current name as a redirect. Grutness...wha? 23:47, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I've renamed it to {{Prog-lang-stub}}, which is probably sufficiently explicit give how the other stubs in Category:Computer science stub templates are named. You'll probably need to use a script to fix all uses if you delete the redirect though. No objection to renaming the category. Pcap ping 23:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I wish you'd read the note at the top of the page which says "DO NOT rename any stub type that has been nominated here while discussion is still in progress. Any necessary renaming will be done when the discussion is closed." Prog-lang-stub is an equally bad name, since this is a computing-based stub - not a linguistics one, and lang-stub types are all for linguistics stubs (also, prog could be progressive, computer program, television programme, or any of several other things). I've added the new name to the nomination - it should also be deleted and renamed once a rename to a more appropriate name has been discussed, and not before. Grutness...wha? 03:37, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Rename to {{proglang-stub}}, and delete redirects. I believe that the claim that "prog" has other meanings is irrelevant, since none of them have anything called "language". However, "lang-stub" isn't a natural component, since a programming language isn't really a language. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Linguists consider programming languages languages, e.g. [1]. Pcap ping 09:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Rename to "prog-lang-stub". This name is quite natural to use and I don't find any of the names it could supposedly be confused for to be at all plausible. --Cybercobra (talk) 12:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Rename per Od Mishehu and Cybercobra. Sorry, Grutness, but I don't think those other uses of "prog" could be used plausibly with "lang" or "language." A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:18, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Computer language stubs

The following - up to the dividing line - is from the listing at WP:CFD.
Category:Computer language stubs - (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Nominator's rationale: Since we don't have an article on "computer language" for almost a year now, I propose this category be deleted. The only reason I'm doing this busy work rater than redirecting {{compu-lang-stub}} to {{PL-stub}} is that an administrator thinks it is necessary and undid my redirect although he has no comment on content of my action, only the form thereof. Pcap ping 10:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete the category and Redirect the stub. "Computer language" = "Programming language", the two are synonyms, having parallel stub templates and categories is duplicative and unnecessary. --Cybercobra (talk) 11:13, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. Looks like uncontroversial maintenance to me. — Miym (talk) 11:20, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment I think the stub and category where originally named "computer language" so they could include languages which where not specifically designed for use as programming languages (e.g. PostScript, XML and friends). It might still be useful to use a somewhat more generic name for this reason, but may also be over-generification, as I suspect a vast majority of these stubs are indeed only related to programming concepts. —Ruud 11:45, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Close - and relist at WP:SFD. Otto4711 (talk) 12:32, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Apparently Twinkle cannot automatically file the stub category deletion discussion in the right place. Someone care to move this discussion over there? Pcap ping 00:30, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] To orphan

Stub types in this section have been deemed deletable and have to be removed from all articles using them, so that they can be deleted.

[edit] To delete

Stub types in this section have been orphaned and can be deleted.

[edit] Listings to log

Stub types with completed discussions which have not yet been logged; remove from this page entirely when logged. Anyone can do this, not just an admin; please see the directions at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion"