Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion

From Freepedia

(Redirected from WP:SFD)
Shortcut:
WP:SFD
WikiProject Stub sorting
edit
Information
Project page talk
⇒ List of stub types talk
⇒ List of stub redirects talk
⇒ Naming guidelines talk
Wikipedia:Stub talk
Wikipedia:Substub talk
Discussion
Criteria (A) talk
Proposals (A) talk
Discoveries (A) talk
Stub types for deletion talk
⇒ Log talk
Category:WikiProject Stub sorting
Deletion Tools

Articles ( howto / log )

{{subst:afd}}
{{subst:afd2|pg=|text=}}
{{subst:afd3|pg=}}

Templates ( howto / log )

{{tfd|}} {{subst:tfdnotice|}}
{{subst:tfd2||vote=|text=}}

Images ( howto / log )

{{ifd}} {{subst:idw|}}
{{subst:ifd2|image=|uploader=}}
AB CV NE NS OB OF OR UE

Categories ( howto / log / C )

{{cfd}} {{subst:cfd2||text=}}
{{cfr|}} {{cfm|}} {{subst:cfr2|||text=}}
{{cfdu|SEC}} {{cfru|NEW|SEC}}
====[[:SEC]]==== {{cfd-article|}}

Stub types

{{sfd-t}} {{sfd-c}} {{sfd-r}}

Miscellaneous {{md1}}
Copyvios {{copyvio}}
Deletion review
Mergers

{{merge}}
{{mergeto}} {{mergefrom}}
{{mergedisputed}}
{{merging}}
{{afd-mergeto}}
{{afd-mergefrom}}

Redirects {{rfd}}
Page moves

{{move}}
{{moveoptions}}
{{CapitalMove}}

Speedy {{delete}} {{db}}

Patent {{nonsense}}
Empty {{empty}}
Vanity {{db-bio}}
Attacks {{db-attack}}
Copyvios {{db-copyvio}}
{{db-repost}}

Unfree images

{{pui}} {{PUIdisputed}}
{{nonfreedelete}}
{{no source}} {{no license}}
{{or-fu-re}} {{or-fu-nr}}

{{Move to Wiktionary}}
{{Move to Wikisource}}
{{Move to Wikibooks}}
{{Move to Wikibooks Cookbook}}
{{Move to Wikiquote}}

Deletion policy / log / watchlist


This page only deals with the deletion 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 have to be put on WP:TFD or WP:CFD, respectively.

Contents

About this page

This page is for the proposal, discussion, and voting on deletion of stub categories, stub templates, and stub redirects. By having the vote on these three closely related matters centralised on one page, it reduced the need for repeating identical arguments on several different Wikipedia deletion pages (WP:CFD, WP:TFD, and WP:RFD) and also reduces the workload on those pages.

Putting a stub type on SfD, and what happens afterwards

  • Mark the affected pages:
    • 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)
  • List the affected pages on the appropriate section of Template:sfd-current. This will let several relevant pages know of the nomination
  • 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 for deletion!
  • 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 per the instructions at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log, and are located at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/Deleted and Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/Not deleted. If the decision is to rename the category or template, the discussion is logged on the "deleted" page, since the stub's name, at least, has been deleted.

Putting {{sfd-r}} on redirects

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

#Redirect [[Template:foo-stub]]

should be changed to: 

{{sfd-r}}{{foo-stub}}

Possible reasons for the deletion of a stub type

  • They are not used in any article, and their category is empty
  • They overlap with other stub categories, or duplicate them outright
  • Their scope is too limited - As a rule of thumb, there should be at least 50 appropriate stubs in existence
  • 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

What this page is not for

Typical voting options

  • Keep (do not delete or modify)
  • Delete (delete template and category)
  • Merge with xx-stub (Delete category, redirect template to xx-stub)
  • Merge with xx-stub without redirect (delete category and template, put xx-stub on all articles that use it)
  • Change scope (reword the template, typically giving it a larger scope. Usually also means renaming the category)
  • BJAODN (add to Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense, then delete)

When voting, 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"

Current listings

According to {{sfd-current}}, the following stub types are being discussed on this page. If you notice a discrepancy, please correct the template.

Listings

October 29th

{{EastEndersStub}}

Until a few minutes ago this was the template for stubs relating to the British soap opera EastEnders. It now redirects to the correctly-named but probably unnecessary {{EastEnders-stub}}. EastEndersStub should be deleted, since it is badly named - if the replacement isn't used on a few more articles, it could well end up here too, eventually. Grutness...wha? 05:44, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

October 27th

{{El Salvador-bcast-stub}} & Cat:El Salvador broadcasting stubs
{{Guatemala-bcast-stub}} & Cat:Guatemala broadcasting stubs

The only thing more embaressing than the fact that someone created them is that its taken almost 3 months since they were discovered for someone to place them up for deletion. 2 articles in the El Salvador cat and 0 in the Guatemala. Caerwine 20:07, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Rename {{compu-fs-stub}} & Cat:Computer file system stubs

With only 35 articles, this stub type is clearly too limited in scope. However, by expanding the scope to computer strage in general, articles about file formats and the like would clearly be within the stub type and would help to clean up the over large {{compu-stub}}. Examining the first page of Cat:Computer stubs was enough to convince me that this change would bring the stub type over the 60 stub threshhold.

Thus I'm recommending a rename to {{compu-storage-stub}} & Cat:Computer storage stubs. Caerwine 19:53, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Cat:Scotland-related stubs

I thought this could be sorted out without a formal listing, but it seems not... Was created without being proposed; no count of the number of appropriate stubs; doesn't follow the "don't use '-related' in category names" convention. This was seemingly originally created as an attempt at a redirect to along with (the also not proposed) Category:Scotland stubs (to which two of those objections also stand, but which on balance seems like a good idea to me). We seem to have ended up with this as the "real" category simply because User:Mais oui! has taken it upon himself to undo my attempt to fix this, single-handedly populate the category, and then complain at length at WP:CFD (of all places) about WP:WSS's high-handed assumption of power, or something. So much for fixing this up while it was still small, I suppose... Delete, restore and populate Cat:Scotland stubs, and point {{Scotland-stub}} there instead. Alai 23:18, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I fully support this proposal. Aecis 23:36, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Ditto here. BTW, some of you might like to add to the comments I've put at CFD...? Grutness...wha? 23:44, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. I forgot to mention, that although there's no Wikipedia:Wikiproject Scotland, the recently created Wikipedia:Scottish Wikipedians' notice board seems to draw its scope in such a way as to essentially be the same thing, so might be construed as a foster-parent for this topic (though hopefully not, particular category name); not that I think there's any real worry on "viability" anyway, there's just not an actual count yet, beyond the 27 in the category at present. Alai 00:39, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • del Scotland-related stubs and use Scotland stubs. BL kiss the lizard 06:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

October 25th

{{Connecticut-stub}}

Created in June, unused at present. There is no Wikiproject for Connecticut either. Delete as we've done with other US state stubs. Also delete the awful trying-to-be-a-category {{Connecticut-Stub}}. --Mairi 03:29, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Delete unused stub templates from June. Holy smeg, delete templates that think they're categories. --Alynna 03:54, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Delete as per precedent of other non-WikiProject state-stubs. I think the "catemplategory" can be speedied as nonsense. Grutness...wha? 05:44, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

{{Days-stub}}

I'm really not sure what this is for; I don't think any articles on days of the year or days of the week are stubs. It's unused and sufficiently malformed (including no category), that nothing there helps. Delete. --Mairi 02:54, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Delete per nom --Alynna 03:54, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

{{Independance-stub}}

Vague scope, which cuts across numerous existing categories. Currently used on one article (which is about movies related to Indian independence). Delete. --Mairi 01:13, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Wow, could this possibly get more vague? Or overlap with more categories? Delete, not useful --Alynna 01:45, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • since we can't really redirect it to {{sociology-stub}}, {{poli-stub}}, and {{statistics-stub}} (all of which use the term "independent"), this should be deleted. And it's not even spelt right. Is there a category? Grutness...wha? 02:17, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Nope, just a redlink. Possibly {{film-stub}} too, for either the page it's on now, or independent films. ;) --Mairi 02:36, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

October 24th

{{Aust-stub}} (redirect)

Austria? Australia? Austin? Australia, apparently. Made two months ago (without the knowledge of WSS, who would, I'm sure, have turned it down flat), and used seven times since then (three of them for things that weren't Australia-stubs anyway). delete. Grutness...wha? 10:14, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep redirects. --SPUI (talk) 00:16, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, although I'm glad to find someone else who supports redirects, if people are carelessly adding this thing to non-Australian articles, it's not worth having. Kappa 00:20, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete ambiguous redirects. -Mairi 02:18, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, ambiguous. Alai 04:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. BlankVerse ∅ 05:46, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, ambigouos notanotheridiot
  • Delete BL kiss the lizard 00:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

{{Fungi-stub}} / Cat:Fungi stubs

Plural names, which is a little unusual, to say the least. Rename to {{Fungus-stub}} (currently a redirect) and Cat:Fungus stubs. Grutness...wha? 11:14, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Rename Alai 04:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

{{Arch-stub}} (redirect)

Archaeologist? Archaeology? Architect? Archbishop? Archduke? Archdeacon? Arches? No. This template redirects to {{Architecture-stub}}. I think this one is a bit too ambiguous. Aecis 12:26, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough. ISTR I created this one, but you're right, it is ambiguous and should go (PS - it is used for arches! :) Grutness...wha? 12:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't arches be under {{struct-stub}}? ;) Aecis 21:57, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
no. strict-stubs for individual buildings and arch-stubs for features of buildings! BL kiss the lizard 22:21, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
I think you miss Aecis's joke. Arches are under a lot of structures :) Grutness...wha? 01:49, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
gah. my brain must be on strike :) BL kiss the lizard 00:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep redirects. --SPUI (talk) 00:16, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, horribly ambiguous. Alai 04:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. BlankVerse ∅ 05:30, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

{{Canada-edu-stub}}

talked about on the discovery page. created as a redirect to canada-university-stub using the old name we dont use any more. BL kiss the lizard 22:21, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah. This isn't speediable, because we haven't has a canada-edu-stub before, but all the other edu-stubs have gone as being too ambiguous (since they refer to universities, not education as a whole) so delete. Grutness...wha? 01:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Delete; bad redirect created from patching move that should never have happened. --Mairi 02:00, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

October 23rd

{{UN-stub}} and its redirect {{un-stub}}

One at a time:

  1. UN-stub used to be for the United Nations, but since February its scope has been broadened to International organisations in general (it feeds into Cat:International organization stubs. So why the old name? This should be renamed to {{International-org-stub}} or maybe {{intl-org-stub}}.
  2. un-stub is a very misleadingly named redirect now (does this mean it's been un-stubbed?) If UN-stub's name is changed it will be even worse. It's only used on about 10 articles, which can easily be re-stubbed - this one can be deleted (BTW, the old United nations stub category, recently rediscovered, was speedied since it had been empty for eight months) Grutness...wha? 09:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Agree on both counts. Both names are misleading, for different reasons. --Alynna 23:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  • A definite delete on {{un-stub}}, but I think there are enough UN-stubs that are actually related to the UN (at least 40 judging from just the article names) that splitting off a new parent stub for {{UN-stub}} should work reasonably well. (i.e. create {{int-stub}} or {{int-org-stub}} (.int is the domain name for international organizations so using just int should be clear enough) feeding into the existing Cat:International organization stubs and then have {{UN-stub}} feed into Cat:United Nations stubs. Caerwine 23:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Rename, keep UN-stub as a redirect, but delete un-stub. Alai 04:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

{{Jersey-bcast-stub}} / Category:Jersey broadcasting stubs

Used on only 2 articles, even tho it was created 2 months ago. I rather doubt there's near 60 relevant articles. Delete. --Mairi

Way too specific. Delete. --Alynna 23:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Alai 04:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

October 22nd

{{Gib-stub}} & Cat:Gibraltar-related stubs

Badly undersized (21, and that's including some locations), not well-named, and has "-related" in the category name to boot. Can't find any trace of this on a criteria, proposals, or discoveries page (aside from Instantnood having just cited it as a precedent). Alai 21:16, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

It was listed somewhere, a long time ago (discoveries, I think - before SFD was up and running). At the very least both category and template need renaming, but unless it suddenly gets a flood of stubs, I'd be just as happy if it wasn't there at all. Grutness...wha? 22:29, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Weak Keep Just went through all the articles marked with Cat:Gibraltar or one of its subcats and managed to raise this to 40 stubs by marking stub articles with this stub. It's still marginal and I definitely would favor renaming to {{Gibraltar-stub}} & Cat:Gibraltar stubs but this is like Macau and China; by size it's a marginal stub category that would get swamped if absorbed by its parent. Caerwine 23:22, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

More to the point, it doesn't really have a parent. We'd need a "British colonies and overseas territories stubs" category for that. Grutness...wha? 11:17, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
We do have a {{BritOT-geo-stub}}, so a {{BritOT-stub}} would be feasible as a parent for {{Gib-stub}}, {{Cayman-stub}}, about a dozen Anguila stubs in {{Caribbean-stub}} or even a replacement to send the stubs to if we get rid of {{Gib-stub}} and {{Cayman-stub}} (currently at 23 stubs). Caerwine 04:15, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Yeees, but BritOT-geo-stub is a bit of a kludge (and isn't well named, either). All but one of the stubs we had that didn't fit into continent categories was for a British colony (the last one, for St. Pierre, in St. Pierre and Miquelon, I expanded beyond stub level). Gibraltar's geo-stubs are normally found marked Euro-geo-stub. Most of the stubs in britOT are things like the Br. Indian Ocean Territories, the Falklands, and Tristan da Cunha. Grutness...wha? 05:49, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
As St. Pierre and Miquellon is a French possession off the coast of Newfoundland, its stubs could have gone into a {{NorthAm-geo-stub}} if it existed. But back to Gibraltar, what's wrong with having Cat:Gibraltar stubs use Cat:United Kingdom-related stubs as a parent? (Other than it should be Cat:United Kingdom stubs that is.) It even shares an MEP district with the UK. After all, I don't think the Spanish irredentists will complain too much about using UK as a parent for Gibraltar. Caerwine 04:40, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
because it's not in the United Kingdom - it's one of its colonies. it would be like having Puerto Rico and Guam in the United States categories. Note, however, that BritOT-geo is a subcategory of UK-geo, although it's not a particularly good place for it. Grutness...wha? 10:08, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Well since I happen to be of the opinion that Puerto Rico and Guam belong in the United States category, that's not a particularly effective argument to persuade me. They just happen to both have a second parent (Caribbean and Oceania respectively) for purposes of stub sorting. They really ought to add "Wikipedia is not a tree." to WP:NOT as far as I'm concerned. Caerwine 22:27, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

{{War-stub}} → {{Mil-hist-stub}}

More likely to reach threshold with a broader scope, which would also handily serve as a super-cat for battle-, WWI- and WWII-. Note that there is a Wikiproject, but it's currently debating whether to merge itself, so this proposal seems in keeping with that spirit. :) Alai 04:32, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Not because I've got any real love for this template, but because there is currently debate going on about it on three different wikiprojects! It is mentioned on WP:WSS/P and WP:WSS/D as a possible redirect to battle-stub, but we're busy waiting to see whether WikiProject Wars and WikiProject Battles merge (which sounds likely) before doing anything about it. Grutness...wha? 05:48, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Still adamant? :) Alai 06:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment — the situation with the two projects should be resolved in a day or so, presumably via a merger. However, the more general discussion surrounding this seems to have put the specific talk of where to redirect {{war-stub}} on hold; my personal preference would be to create {{mil-hist-stub}} as above, but if such further cluttering of the {{mil-stub}} hierarchy is a bad idea, it could be redirected to {{battle-stub}} directly. Kirill Lokshin 17:14, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
    • I think the 'further cluttering' is a good idea, myself! The root category, {{mil-stub}}, has only recently dipped below the 800 upper threshold, so a bit more structure on it is a thoroughly good idea, IMO. Alai 20:46, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
    • mil-hist-stub is a problem as hist-stubs been split by country so it would cut through several catagories BL kiss the lizard 18:37, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
      • I concur with Kirill with the rename, it's the most accurate rename. But I think (for the reasons Lacertae mentions) we should see it as a subdivision of mil rather than hist. Thus, maybe {{hist-mil-stub}} may make more sense. The Minister of War 20:22, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
        • I'm happy with either mil-hist- or hist-mil-. Just put it that way round as Cat:Military history stubs is the most obvious name of the category, and corresponds with the proposed name of the merged WP... Obviously, it'd equally be a sub-cat of both. Alai 20:46, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
          • The proposed name is Military History (Historical Military doesnt sound half as good :-) ), so i guess {{mil-hist-stub}} would be better then? Also, i've noticed there already is a subdivision on Military History within the history category, so it seems the damage to the subcategories in hist will be minimal. The Minister of War 21:42, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  • I support the creation of the mil-hist-stub. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:37, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Support the above proposal now that the project merger is complete. Kirill Lokshin 03:09, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. The Minister of War 09:18, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

{{Greeting-stub}} / Cat:Greeting stubs

Too specific, rather doubtful there's near 60 stub articles. Delete --Mairi 01:49, 22 October 2005 (UTC) Woah. Um....yes. Delete. Why was this created in the first place? --WikiFanaticTalk Contribs 5:35, 23 October 2005 (CDT)

  • retag these as socio-stub and lose this stub type, I'd say. Grutness...wha? 11:19, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Alai 04:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Cat:Catalonia-related stubs → Cat:Category:Catalonia stubs

Newly created as per WP:WSS/P, but the creator of it didn't realise we've been getting rid of the "-related"s. Rename now while it's still quite small. Grutness...wha? 07:22, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

October 21st

{{South-Korea-bio-stub}} / Cat:South Korean people stubs

{{North-Korea-bio-stub}} / Cat:North Korean people stubs

Between these two stub types there are only some 90 articles, and considering that - with the exception of fifty years of Korea's exceptionally long history - the two parts have not been divided, it would make a certain amount of sense to merge these into a single {{Korea-bio-stub}} and Cat:Korean people stubs. If the vote is to keep the current set up, I'd suggest losing the first hyphen of the templates and making it NorthKora- and SouthKorea-. Grutness...wha? 11:58, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

I created these and agree, a single korea-bio-stub is a better idea. I would have simply deleted these myself and created a unitary one, but I didn't want to bother having to get bureaucratic authorization to do so. Sarge Baldy 15:08, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Speedy deletemergerename then, as creator agrees. Alai 04:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

{{papal-stub}} to {{pope-stub}}

Afaik, the general format for stub templates is [noun]-stub. Aecis 11:12, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

It is... so renaming looks like a good idea for this one. Grutness...wha? 11:33, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Rename per Grutness. --WikiFanaticTalk Contribs 5:18, 23 October 2005 (CDT)
Rename Alai 04:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Rename Vermi 06:03, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

{{bioinformatics-stub}}

Used once in two months, no cat, v. specialized. delete? BL kiss the lizard 22:43, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Delete as per nom. --Mairi 18:09, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

{{fictional-place stub}}

Weve got a fcit-location-stub and this looks... nasty. delete! BL kiss the lizard 22:51, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Yikes! Another of User:Maoririder's creations, by the looks of it! Get rid of it! Grutness...wha? 06:00, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Here goes... now someone can write a article about jggjjfffjlgnflgnegnwghroghorgrhgnfgm,b df,bnfjgofigiorgjrgk,ergnreg and put the stub tag on it. Delete. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 06:11, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

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.

October 20th

space+stub redirects

These redirects:

all point to $1-stub, but all are listed at the stub redirects page as a redirect from an alternate name, which they actually aren't - the're just a remnant of a wrong naming convention. They need to be phased out in favor of the properly hyphenated name and deleted. --Joy [shallot] 10:55, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Can we also add {{Cricket stub}}? Grutness...wha? 11:08, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Why? What's wrong with a redirect? Keep all. --SPUI (talk) 19:30, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
  • delete SPUI we dont mind redirects if theyre names are right but these ones the names are bad. Hyphens are used on all stub names. BL kiss the lizard 23:38, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
    • I ask again - what's wrong with these redirects? --SPUI (talk) 00:13, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Exactly what BL Lacertae says. They're not in line with standard stub redirect naming. They don't have hyphens, which all stubs do, according to stub naming protocol. As such - like all the others which have been deleted here before for the same reason - they should go. Grutness...wha? 00:57, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
        • What about that makes them wrong as a redirect? --SPUI (talk) 01:04, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
          • Their name. They don't follow stub naming rules. BL kiss the lizard 01:10, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
          • The name is wrong (damn edit conflicts!) Grutness...wha? 01:11, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
            • That would be a problem if they were stub templates. But these are redirects. Read Wikipedia:Redirect. Learn what a redirect is. Also read [1]. And remove this shit when you're done. --SPUI (talk) 01:13, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
              • That's besides the point. The point is that we do not need these half a dozen redirects when we don't at the same time have redirects for {{bio stub}}, {{sci stub}}, {{hist stub}} or even {{ST ep stub}}. Keeping these few black goats does not really help much, it may only encourage more of this fodder to appear. --Joy [shallot]
          • doesnt matter if theyre redirects or not the name is still wrong and that page you linked is about articles not templates. and grutnesses changes to the page were putting in something that everyone who uses this page does anyway for newbies who didnt know. if it was just grutness then there wouldnt be redirects on this page listed by me or joy or mairi and the archive has lots of redirects deleted here since the page started, most of them deleted because the names were wrong BL kiss the lizard 01:31, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, redirects are cheap and it's damned annoying having to check each one of these (and similar) for spaces and hyphens before you use it. However, if there is an established convention for hyphens, move all existing stubs with spaces in them to ones with hyphens. The point of redirects is to make it easier for links to get to their targets - if we start ditching all these redirects, why don't we remove Free links from Mediawiki while we're at it and only allow CamelCase? Alphax τεχ 02:55, 22 October 2005 (UTC) Delete then. Alphax τεχ 16:19, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  • First of all, I think they're correctly listed here. If redirects to stub-types aren't stub-types for all practical, procedural purposes, I don't know what they are. If we want to cross the t's on this, we can make the wording on this explicit, and double-check with RfD that they're not going to feel horribly cheated thereby. On the merits of retaining them: I think on balance it's a good idea to get rid of them. They don't serve the same purpose as redirects in the article space, and in this case, they're just adding to the impression of stub naming conventions as an ad hoc mess. (It is "stub-stub"? "stub stub"? "stub-Stub"? etc.) Sooner we make these entirely consistent, and get people used to using the canonical sort, the better. There may be other cases in which there's a clearer case for retention, but frankly if they're removed over-zealously, it'll be stub-sorters that end up fixing it, so there's an "on our own heads be it" logic to this being decided here. And lastly, can we please not have edit wars on meta-pages, and come to that, gratuitous incivility? Alai 03:12, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
    • D'oh, the scope aspect is already covered explicitly on this page. I'll stop now before I start personally attacking myself. Alai 03:55, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
      • I added it yesterday when it became clear that not everyone knew the scope of this page yet. I'd assumed - since we've been dealing with redirects since this page started and no-one had complained - that everyone knew we'd been dealing with redirects as well. But apparently not, so (as I stated on the talk page) I clarified things. Grutness...wha? 05:56, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Yeah, it's here because Grutness just added it here. The point of this page was to combine discussions that had been split between TFD and CFD - a redirect does not have that problem. --SPUI (talk) 06:40, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
      • It was added because one editor in four months didn't understand how this page works and has worked since it started. Everyone else seems to understand it perfectly well. I decided to clarify things to stop someone else stumbling on the page in February 2006 and thinking something was wrong. Look at the page's earliest archive - we've been debating the deletion of redirects here since the day this page went live. That wouldn't have happened if it was only intended for categories and direct templates. And if it was, then there would have been complaints from those watching page deletions as soon as we started deleting redirects. There were none. Grutness...wha? 06:57, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
        • Nah, I think you're just too wrapped up in your stub sorting shit to realize that redirects are useful. Got that? Useful. --SPUI (talk) 09:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
          • Grutness, seems a logical addition to me, as per my after-the-fact suggestion. I've left a message at RFD to check they don't consider their turf (or indeed toes) to be being trod on.
          • SPUI, the original motivation was in part to deal with said combinations, but now that we have this as a stand-alone process, it makes sense to consider stub categories without templates, and stub templates without categories, for the simple reason of having related discussion about the same "quasi-namespace" in the one place. If we started listing the former at WP:CFD, the latter at WP:TFD, and the redirects at WP:RFD, people would think we'd gone slightly mad. And then tell us to take it back here, as Grutness says. And again, can we please have a bit of civility of tone? Alai 15:44, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Some redirects ar useful. Others aren't. If all redirects were useful, we wouldn't have an RFD page. But we do - because some redirects are not useful. For the same reason, not all stub redirects are deleted. We keep them if they're useful and worth keeping. You've even voted against a stub redirect yourself further down this page - so clearly not all stub redirects are useful. Grutness...wha? 10:46, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. BlankVerse ∅ 05:40, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Tedernst 07:49, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

October 19th

{{AU-depot-stub}} and {{Australia-depot-stub}} (both redirects)

Both of these currently redirect to {{Australia-rail-stub}}. I'm ambivalent about Australia-depot-stub, but the AU one should definitely go. It's currently fairly heavily used, but after the shifting-around of melbourne and Sydney stubs currently going on it should be a fairly manageable size for re-stubbing and Australia-depot-stub should be almost empty. Grutness...wha? 00:58, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

October 18th

{{California County Routes Stub}} / Cat:California County Routes stubs

A recent discuvery missed out in the previous road discussions below. Is this one needed at all? If it is, surely California-road-stub is a better name... Grutness...wha? 23:53, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

There is a WP that goes with this. Wikipedia:WikiProject California County Routes However it would be nice to make it singular. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 01:51, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as is capitalized per WP:MOS and possibly add hyphens to placate the people who desire them if needed. It's attached to a wikiproject.Gateman1997 02:08, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep but rename.. There is a WikiProject, and List of California County Routes shows a l-o-n-g list of non-yet-created, and not-yet-tagged California county route articles. The rename should add dashes, per WP:WSS, and county route should be singular and lower case, per WP:MOS. BlankVerse ∅ 02:18, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as is, maybe hyphens. California County Route is a specific classification. Just as a road could be maintained by the county (rural areas?) but still not be a County Route. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 02:22, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Rename to California-county-route-stub, as there is a wikiproject. Definitely needs to be singular, hyphenated and 'stub' lowercased. --Mairi 02:56, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Rename to either California-road-stub or California-county-route-stub; or if all else fails, as a matter of complete-red-line, do-we-have-to-have-a-formal-policy-to-say-it, "end your stub template names in '-stub'", California-County-Route-stub. There's some actual logic to this one, as there's two different road-stub-cats for California (as opposed to the ones that have come along since, which have only one per state, yet insist on being specific to "State Highways"). Alai 17:19, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Rename to either California-county-route-stub or California-County-Route-stub. --Alynna 17:58, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Rename to {{California-road-stub}} which can cover both state routes and county routes in California, It would also have the advantage of covering non state or county roads, and even stubs for Interstate highways and US highways in California can be marked with this in addition to {{UShighway-stub}} and {{Interstate-stub}}. And if not that, at least correct the capitalization to {{California-county-route-stub}} -Jeff 13:28, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
  • There is a distinction between California County Route and California county route. The former is in the system; the other is just any ordinary route that runs in the county. Interstate 5 is a California county route but not a California County Route. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 00:03, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
    • That's not what I get from county route. Interstates will presumably be sorted as such anyway: what roads are there that are "county routes" but not "County Routes" (by which I gather you mean, with that precise phrase in their names), that would be liable to be undesirably included in a lowercased name? I get the impression that either, a) there aren't any, or b) including them in the stub type would be organisationally useful. Alai 01:50, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Sorry, that was a really retarded example I gave. Here is another: Spruce Street is located out in the rural country, away from any major city. It is a residential street (residential because 2 people live on it). In fact, it is a dirt road. Would it be a county route? After all, it is maintained by the county... and it implies that people can write Wikipedia articles about their rural residential streets. Also, this stub goes with a WP- and the WP considers County Routes to be numbered. (A17, etc). --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 02:13, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
        • Fair enough. :) Given the apparent state of my brain this evening, I can't really cast any stones. I would have thought it wasn't a "county route" in the sense of the county highway/county route/county road article, which uses exactly the definition you have in mind (as I understand it, at least), but doesn't capitalise it. Obviously in the case of simply -road-, what you say would be quite true, and seems to me to be broadly desirable. (If there ever got to be a lot of these, then re-splitting in more specific terms would start to make more sense.) Though I do think the existing, on-going WP should have a certain degree of latitude here in scope of definition, so I'm not gung-ho in favour of -road- in this case, though I'd personally mildly prefer it. Alai 03:27, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

October 17th

{{Music Video-stub}} → {{Music-video-stub}}

Only created today and used twice, but there is a wikiproject. Rename to standard capitalization and hyphenation, tho. --Mairi 04:47, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

agreed. Rename. Grutness...wha? 04:51, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Irregularly named US-road-stub sub-cats

The following were all created via process, it must be said, but are nonetheless erratically named (routes, roads, highways? Caps? Hyphens?), inconsistently used (non-highways in titular "highway" categories, and where only one "road" category exists per state), and in several cases, well below the usual creation theshold (supposedly 60ish ordinarily, somewhat less with WP).

Alai 01:54, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Rename to {{Kentucky-road-stub}}. Audubon Parkway, Louie B. Nunn Parkway, Wendell H. Ford Western Kentucky Parkway and William H. Natcher Parkway are officially designated Kentucky State Highway 9005, Kentucky State Highway 9008, Kentucky State Highway 9002 and Kentucky State Highway 9007, respectively. There are currently only 10 as the project is just getting started. We had new members join this past week to help out. Once underway, there is the potential for approximately 120 stubs at even given time--but once the project has accomplished its goals, I would see that the stub wouldn't necessarily be needed as {{US-road-stub}} could be used for any new highways created by the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet--which doesn't happen often. Renaming to {{Kentucky-road-stub}} will follow stub hyphenation presedence, alleviate confusion on the Parkway vs. Highway naming convention and provide for the segregation of KY road stubs from other state projects. Thanks for pointing out the naming convention disparity. I agree it needs to be cleaned up. >: Roby Wayne Talk • Hist • E@ 02:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete {{Nhroute}}, {{Missouri-State-Highway-Stub}} as they are not used. As for the ones with stubs but no WikiProject, a move was underway to build a "catchall" project for roads that didn't have a state-related WikiProject. >: Roby Wayne Talk • Hist • E@ 02:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
I created it, see below. I did populate the missouri stub today. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 04:29, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Rename for consitency. They were created as part of the state highways wikiproject I do believe. I'd say "highway", "route", "road" etc should stay the way they are as long as they are consistent with the way the respective states name them. Different states have different conventions on how to name their state highways and that should be reflected in these stub names. However the capitalization needs to be changed. An example is {{Maryland-State-Highway-Stub}} which should be capatalized {{Maryland-state-highway-stub}} since it is not a proper noun, the others should have thier capatalization changed accordingly as well. Also "stub" should be lowercase and hyphens should be used to be consistent with the way other stubs are named.

My exact votes are:

(Changed to {{xx-road-stub}} see below)

-Jeff 02:41, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Maryland State Highway is a proper noun, see Talk:List of California State Routes/Archive2 for a similar discussion. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:41, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

*See my votes below I realize how weird that sounds but here is the breakdown: