Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2006/September/1

Automobile 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 mm dnsnbaba{| class="wikitable"

! header 1 ! header 2 ! header 3 The result of the debate was delete
 * row 1, cell 1
 * row 1, cell 2
 * row 1, cell 3
 * row 2, cell 1
 * row 2, cell 2
 * row 2, cell 3
 * }ade on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.''
 * row 2, cell 3
 * }ade on the template's or category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this section.''

Malformed and redundant to auto-stub. I would have just redirected it, but we seem to be on a "delete all redirects that have spaces" kick. ~ Amalas rawr  =^_^=  20:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * delete Monni 20:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per said kick, AKA the stub naming conventions. Alai 20:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Alai Caerwine Caerwhine 04:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Alai. Michael 23:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * ''Delete"" Goldenrowley 06:10, 7 September 2006 (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.

Canada-hist-bio-stub / /  (redirect)

 * 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

When a split of the Canadian bio stubs was proposed, this was the one category that was not approved. Convenient, then, that this is the only one that gets created. --fuzzy510 16:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * As the person dumb enough to propose this in the first place, I believe it's populable, though whether it's a good axis for a split is an open question. I'll stay silent on that, but at the very least delete the incorrectly pluralised version,, either in favour of, or as well as, the other.  Alai 16:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * As the dimwit who created this stub, I apologize (in the future can we strike stubs which are not approved for us dimwits). However, I guess I always liked this stub since there are many articles from the Dictionary of Canadian Biography which are hard to place in stub categories anywhere else. --YUL89YYZ 18:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I can certainly believe that's so, on the same basis as the US and AU "settlers" who're mainly notable for essentially that. But hist-bio might be a little on the broad side, since it'd probably overlap quite a bit with politicians, writers, etc, which it'd be better to sort as those.  Alai 19:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Creating bio-stubs based on whether people are historical or not is not a good idea. Everyone is "historical" if they're notable enough to have an article, even people still alove. As such, scoping a category listed as "histoical" becomes a total nightmare - which is why it is a term never used for bio-stubs. A rename/rescope to canada-settler-stub, for people who were simply settlers and nothing more, is certainly a possibility, but the current name is a very bad idea. Grutness...wha?  23:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * That's kinda an argument against, mind you, never mind the stub type. I'd be agreeable to a rescope, though I think it might be marginal on size grounds.  I count about 25 , and another 8 in .  If we threw in  (42) it'd certainly seem to be viable.  Is that a coherent scope?  Alai 07:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Goldenrowley 06:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) - adding my reason Grutness makes strong point I am convinced everyone worhty to be in the archives is historical.Goldenrowley 18:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Grutness. Valentinian (talk) / (contribs) 22:06, 11 September 2006 (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.

Lea-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

Who knows what a "Lea" is? Wrong. It's a "Law Enforcement Organization". Unlicensed creation, no cat, 18 entrants, bad name - we can let go of this stub type. - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe someone already proposed a law-enforcement-stub, so create that, shove those in there, and delete this. Alai 02:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * "Lea" is a river in north London. Rename/delete as per Alai. Grutness...wha?  23:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete My mom's name is Lea. Goldenrowley 06:16, 7 September 2006 (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.

Cz-geo-stub / → Czechia-geo-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 rename

Unreasonably cryptic, if technically unambiguous (Cz is a redirect). Sets a bad precedent for using TLDs as (well, beyond that already established by US, UK and NZ, though at least those are generally-used acronyms). Rename to Czechia-geo-stub, Czech-geo-stub or CzechRepublic-geo-stub, in that order of preference, probably keeping all of the above (as) redirects, though I'm open to some rationalisation. Alai 01:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, and also rename the category. Using the rather uncommon "short form" name in the category doesn't save anyone any typing, and is inconsistent with the parents,  and, not to say the articles, which are at Czech Republic and Geography of the Czech Republic.  Alai 05:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Isn't the current name the result of an old naming dispute? Btw, to be consistent with the other Czech stub templates, it would be Czech-geo-stub. Valentinian (talk) / (contribs) 20:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm agreeable to that. Alai 20:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, for czechs, "Czechia" sound a bit horrible, so better use one of the other two names. I suggest the shorter, Czech-geo-stub --Bilboq 23:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It sounds pretty horrible to me too, I just didn't like to say. :) (That it's not taken off in the Anglophone world, despite decrees as to its semi-officialness by the .cz government, doesn't entirely surprise me.)  Alai 23:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

If you look at the history of this one (as Valentinian points out), you'll see why it was created with the name of cz-geo-stub. There was a long, bitter edit war between those who preferred the name Czech Republic and those who preferred the name Czechia. This template was actually protected for about six months because of it. I don't want that edit war to start up again, but would certainly welcome a better name (and CzechR-geo-stub would be the best one IMHO, possibly with redirects from Czech- and CzechRepublic-). I'd definitely favour moving it to be in line with the article names if those who were warring have moved on, though. Grutness...wha?  23:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, Czechs can't agree on "correct" name not only in wikipedia, similar "wars" are going in blogs, media, personal talk, etc... These wars between Czech (Česko) and Czechia (Čechy) will probably go for some time ... advantage of Czech-geo-stub is that you can say that "Czech" is an adjective (Český), as in "Czech Republic", which might shut up those "Czechia" preferring people. People from Moravia will hate the Czechia probably the most, as technically Czech Republic is divided into 3 historical parts: Czechia, Moravia and Moravian Silesia. Maybe CzechR will be the best though ... --Bilboq 00:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * That'd be a fairly distant 4th in my preference ordering, but it'd beat "Cz". Alai 00:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Rename the category to match parents. Delete Cz-geo-stub as cryptic TLA. As for the other templates/redirects, I don't care which one is the template and which are the redirects, but keep them all. Caerwine Caerwhine 04:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Rename to Czech-geo-stub. That's the most intuitive choice. Mutebutton 15:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is me who generates most of Czech Rep. geographic stubs and I have no problems with Cz. Artificial name Czechia did not catch on, CzechRepublic is too long, Czech has too many meanings. Cz is short, known and fitting and anyway, in long term all Cz stubs will get filled. Pavel Vozenilek 13:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Rename to Czech form. Petr K 14:17, 8 September 2006 (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.