Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/August/6

TRNC-stub, Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus-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 speedy delete


 * The most controversial of all stub templates seems to have risen from the grave. Given the preceding history for this template, I don't feel the slightest hope that new edit wars won't break out over it yet again. We should stick to only having country-level templates for internationally well-recognized entities. Last discussion was, and the previous (rejected) proposal was Strong delete per precedent in similar cases. Valentinian T / C 09:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete There is already a stub template for Cyprus. No need to start another one. El Greco (talk · contribs) 16:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Somaliland, Western Sahara, and Transnistria all have their own stubs, so why can't the TRNC? The internationally recognized government of Cyprus may claim to have sovereignity over the whole island, including the north, but in reality, they don't, so there's no valid reason why this stub should be deleted. Onur 18:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The other templates were not started by members of this project but by outsiders. They should be deleted as well, like we did with Abkhazia-stub, Ossetia-stub and others. The reason that the current templates for Cyprus use a map rather than the internationally recognized flag is in order to avoid a ton of revert wars between editors wishing to add their own flag to articles about the locations north of the 1974 division line. So the Cypriot templates are based on a geographical scope encompassing the entire island, rather than a political one. Valentinian T / C 19:00, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete and salt as re-creation of previously deleted stub type. Onur, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument - if you feel strongly about those other stub types, bring them here. They shouldn't exist anyway since, like TRNC, they are not widely recognised internationally. Western Sahara might squeeze in as an exception, but only just. The others are definitely SFD-worthy. Grutness...wha?  00:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy and salt. It boggles the mind that this exactly recreates the earlier deletion, spacey NG-non-compliance and all.  If you want this recreated, please obtain a prior consensus.  Alai 02:51, 7 August 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.

Cue-sports-stub rename

 * 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 fought long and hard for this name, and now something like 5 months after the fact I conclude that this was a mistake. (I.e., yes, I am admitting I erred and was an pain in the butt). I detested the multi-word "glomming" used in stub template names, and still don't like it, but now recognize that it is, and there's nothing I can do about that. I would rather go with the consensus naming convention than try to nip at that convention by defying it. The inconsistency is probably annoying to more editors (everyone doing stub sorting) than the convention is to others (me and a handful of other grumblers, if even they are still around). So, rename to cuesports-stub (and either keep the cue-sports-stub redir, or fix all the present usages with a bot or an AWB trawl). And no I don't concede on the sports vs. sport issue on this one (not a US vs. UK thing, but a simply fact thing - cue&#91; &#93;sports refers to more than one sport, so the plural is appropriate; it has nothing to do with the -sport- WP:SS pseudo-namespace at all. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 08:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support change per SMcCandlish, and allow him/her/it to preserve his/her/its dignity. Cheers! Her Pegship  (tis herself) 05:04, 7 August 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.