Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2006/September/5

ChannelIslands-Political-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

Poorly named stub category. Never proposed, let alone approved, and with only 23 stubs - of which 15 are bio-stubs. ChannelIslands-stub was created by the same user at the same time, and it has a grand total of one stub. While that one could be kept for a while to see whether it is of any use (which I suspect it will be), the politics one definitely requires deletion (if, by some chance, the vote is to keep, it should be renamed in accordance with the naming guidelines). Grutness...wha?  04:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC) RichardColgate 12:31, 5 September 2006 (UTC) DariusJersey 13:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Goldenrowley 06:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC) DariusJersey 12:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Caerwine Caer’s whines 04:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. It is way too small and as used now, it cuts through the system used elsewhere. Valentinian (talk) / (contribs) 06:31, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is part of an ongoing project, and will expand over time I only have so much time to write. The Channel Islands Stub should go though as there is a Jersey Stub and a Guernsey Stub which I have moved all the articles initially in Channel Islands stubs into. Apologies for not checking the procedure though. There are political stub categories for other countries so I do not see any reason why the Channel Islands shouldn't also have one.
 * Some other countries have them - but only those where there are a sufficiently large number to warrant a separate category, and only when the parent stub category is large enough to require a split. And they don't include bio-stubs. At the current time, there aren't enough stubs for a separate split to be worthwhile to either stub sorters or - more importantly - editors of Channel Island articles. And since there is no Jersey-stub nor Guernsey-stub, I don't see where you could have moved those articles to. If there were such stubs already, I would have also nominated ChannelIslands-stub for deletion. Grutness... wha?   01:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The trouble is that there is no 'parent category' for Channel Islands stubs other than stub. I see your point though Channel Islands stubs would be most useful as a starting point. The only stub category I can otherwise see is Channel Islands Geo Stubs though I can see that some originally Channel Islands stubs have been moved into the Jersey and Guernsey catgeory. I think if just Channel Islands stub is used then there will be too many articles and some sub-categorisation can occur and geo and political would seem to be the best two.
 * If you'll read my comments again, you'll see that this is why I have suggested keeping ChannelIslands-stub and its associated category. Richard Colgate seems to have muddied the waters thoroughly by moving articles from the category which I suggested keeping but leaving those in the category I proposed deleting. I repeat: there is no need for a separate "political stubs" category for the Channel Islands, especially since such category is clearly being used contrary to the stub hierarchy. There is, however, a strong possibility that an overall Channel Islands stubs category would be very useful. Grutness...wha?  23:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and resort them, and this is just my humble opinion.
 * Keep For me personally (as a resident of the Channel Islands) this is the most useful category on wikipedia, could quite easily meet the minimum criteria if all articles which should be in this category were added. Most of the information is not widely known locally. I perfectly understand that this will have limited appeal in the wider world. But hey most of the stuff on wikipedia is of absolutely no interest to me either.
 * Nobody is suggesting to delete this material. We are debating the proper name / scope of a stub template, nothing more. Valentinian (talk) / (contribs) 20:37, 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.