Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/April/17

and

 * 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

The first is premature downmerging of Turkey-band-stub which has exactly 30 stubs. The second is a placeholder category with no template whose only purpose is to feed the first into, , and. Leaving aside the question of whether such a category is a good idea (The few other per country music stub categories all have associated templates.) it will have no members once the first category is deleted. Delete both categories. Caerwine Caer’s whines 15:20, 17 April 2007 (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.

Monk-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

Unproposed, no category, and not what you think. No, this is for the television series Monk, not a sub-type of Reli-bio-stub. The parent permcat has 72 articles - over 80% of them would need to be stubs for this to reach threshold. Grutness...wha?  03:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually it is exactly what I thought it would be, given the tastes for some editors for popular culture. Unless there's a Wikiproject, I can't see this ever reaching threshold, and even then, given the ambiguity, it would need a rename to Monk-tvseries-stub or the like.  Delete Caerwine Caer’s whines  05:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per threshold concerns. --Dweller 12:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Apparently no one here at Wikipedia bothers to read anything I say. Newsflash: I'm new to Wikipedia. So, yeah, I wlil mess up some things on accident and will try to fix it. But don't get all in a huff over me, God! helpme — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshEdgar (talk • contribs)
 * With respect, I would have though being new to Wikipedia would make you more likely to check the instructions before making a stub type. And it's not a case of "getting in a huff over you" - it's a case of trying to fix up a stub problem, irrespective of who created it. Grutness...wha?  23:43, 19 April 2007 (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.

IT-derived-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 to ITsource

Not really a stub template, so definitely shouldn't be named as one. Also has nothing whatsoever to do with Information technology, despite its name.Rename to something more appropriate and less stubby. Why not just IT-derived? Grutness...wha?  03:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Or ITRef following the example of FRref, or even better, why not just use Translation/Ref which does almost the same thing and works for any language. The only thing that template lacks is the English name of the language the other Wikipedia uses. Delete and replace with Translation/Ref, altho as a non-stub template with a stub template name, perhaps we should send this to TFD instead. Caerwine Caer’s whines 05:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes I see that giving it a name ending in “stub” was misleadingly against convention: thanks for spotting it. Translation/Ref is what I use when translating an article from the Italian Wikipedia fairly closely and fairly fully. Here, though, I found myself beginning to write a series of stubs using much longer articles as sources and “This article was initially translated from this Wikipedia article…” would have been misleading: there might not be a single sentence in the stub which was a translation of a sentence in the source. I considered ITRef by analogy with FRref, but again the situation was rather different: “This article draws heavily on…” is rather a different kind of message. How about ITref (summary)? —Ian Spackman 07:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Since you (and presumably other bilingual English-Italian speakers) will be the one using it, whatever you feel is best will probably be fine. Just as long as it doesn't end in "-stub" :) Grutness...wha?  13:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * A further thought - how about ITsource? That would makeit sound like it had been largely sourced from it:wiki, which is the point of the template, no? Grutness...wha?  00:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes I prefer source to ref. On the other hand I would like to keep in a word like summarised or précis, because an implicit part of the message is, “If you can read Italian, you could quickly expand this from the Italian article“. OK, let’s go for ITsource and I’ll later add a parameter to allow the wording to be switched between something like “This article was initially summarized from…” to “This article was largely sourced from”. Thanks to everyone for their inputs: including the “let’s delete it” one, because it made me clarify my thoughts. So I say Rename to ITsource. —Ian Spackman 12:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll speedy this tomorrow, and 'bot over the transclusion, if there's no input to the contrary in the meantime. Alai 23:42, 19 April 2007 (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.

SA-actor-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 to SouthAfrica-actor-stub and upmerge

Only one stub gained in nearly a year since this unproposed, misnamed, category-free stub type was created. Stubsense suggests only 14 actor stubs from South Africa, though this may be undersorting. There's a current proposal on the table for an Africa-actor-stub, which would give this something to be upmerged into, but it would need renaming to SouthAfrica-actor-stub even then. may be better to delete this and start from scratch if and when necessary. Grutness...wha?  02:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename and upscope to Africa-actor-stub, deleting the current template. Not enough South African actors as of yet for even an upmerged template and certainly enough Africans for an upmerged template at the very least. Caerwine Caer’s whines 02:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename to SouthAfrica-actor-stub, keep and upmer-- erm, well, feed into a higher-level category than the one this one's currently missing, as it were. I don't see much point in having thresholds for the existance of upmerged templates, which seem to me preferable than continental templates which at some point may end up being deleted...  (OK, that would seem to be quite some ways off for African actors, I'll grant you.)  Alai 04:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Alai If you look at, you will find 43 articles in that category and, as usual, most are stubs without the national bio template. Support upmerged template in South African bio's and Africa-actors--Thomas.macmillan 18:59, 19 April 2007 (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.

Track and field athletics biography

 * 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

I only see a need to add the "track and field" to the category name so as to follow the permparent where it has been added for those countries where it is needed to differentiate it from sports in general. If anyone wants to add the Asia and Canada cats so they can be renamed Asian and Canadian respectively, I'll support that (as well as United States to American), but since the whole adjectival vs. noun debate is still going on at the Stub Sorting naming guidelines talk page, I thought I'd defer those for now. Caerwine Caer’s whines 00:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename →
 * Rename →
 * Rename I had been meaning to propose those weeks ago. Waacstats 10:26, 17 April 2007 (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.