Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2012/May/6

May 6[edit]

Women's history stubs[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 discussion was Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_July_22#Women.27s_history_stubs. (NAC) Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{WrestleMania XXVIII} _{The Undertaker 20–0} 12:58, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cat:Women's history stubs / {{Women's-History-stub}}

Unproposed and badly formed template, and with the estimation of capturing 4,000 articles. I'm not particularly opposed to splitting along the line of women's history, but a category which holds 4,000 articles isn't useful. A request was filed at Wikipedia:Bot requests#Bot for Women.27s History project stubs to tag all articles within Cat:Stub-Class Women's History articles - perhaps a misunderstanding of the different uses of the two systems. What to do is not obvious. If there can be appropriate splits found, then I'd be happy with keeping this template and category as a parent with cub categories below. If we are to keep this template, then at least it needs to be renamed to {{womens-hist-stub}}. If there are no apparent splits, then I don't think this type is useful beyond the already existing splits by nationality and profession. Severo^TC 15:10, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As the person who created this stub template, I don't have a problem with whatever you do to correct this. All aspects of this, including my bot request, have been a misunderstanding. But I want you to know, I didn't just wake up one day and decide to go off and create all these things. I was pointed that direction by some very well-meaning editors who thought they were helping.

My original intent was to set up a Tedder bot to daily generate a list of new articles created for WikiProject Women's History. That's how this began, but it was difficult to get any information on how to do this. Tedder can't set up a bot without search terms, etc. etc. And so I began searching for someone to get this done, mostly not finding answers or even replies.

I had been advised by an experienced editor to create such a stub, as a way to find new articles for a Tedder bot for WikiProject Women's History. I was completely unaware that stub templates needed to be proposed and approved. I had also been advised to run an AWB after the template was created. I don't deal with AWB, so I input a bot request.

The creation of the category was proposed by another editor who said this could correct it. Two different editors telling me two different things that both felt would have been correct. Finger pointing after the horse ran out of the barn isn't the answer. All I wanted - really - was somebody to set up an automated daily Tedder bot so that project could see a daily list of new articles created. My intent, like theirs, was to do something good for that project. This has taken on a life of its own, but we need to get all this corrected, as cleanly and quickly as possible. Maile66 (talk) 11:54, 7 May 2012 (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.

}