Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/December/16

Video-game-gameplay-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, now that it's orphaned. Wizardman 18:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC) For some reason, this wasn't orphaned and deleted when the stub type was renamed (to Videogame-gameplay-stub) and logged earlier in the month. Delete. I hope this doesn't mean that there are a load of cases where the vote has explicity said "rename" (and implicity required the deletion of non-standard names, per the comments in this page's headers) where there has not been a deletion of the old name. If there are, there's going to have to be a LOT of searching through the SFD log to find what should have been deleted... Grutness...wha?  11:22, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Before it is deleted, there are over 50 articles that are currently using this redirect stub that need to be edited first. Dbiel (Talk) 17:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note my original comment - they should have been orphaned and deleted. That automatically means they still need to be orphaned. Grutness...wha?  19:36, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, but of course, orphan first. JERRY talk contribs 02:36, 22 December 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.

Several undeleted redirects

 * 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 '''keep the ungulates one (no consensus, so may be re-proposed at some point). Delete the other four'''

I was right in my comments in the section above, sadly. Someone has been closing and logging "rename" debates here without orphaning and deleting the old template names. Just looking back through the logs to the beginning of September, I've discovered the following:
 * NorthernMarianaIslands-radio-station-stub
 * 3K-stub
 * Korean-cuisine-stub
 * Afro-stub
 * Even-toed-ungulate-stub

As I see it, we have two options:
 * 1) Accept these sorts of names as redirects and abandon the whole idea of having uniform names, resigning ourselves to picking through a morass of occasionally whimsical and often ambiguous names in the faint hope that we will discover stub templates that actually have the meanings we think they have (like to guess what Afro-stub or 3K-stub refer to without looking them up?)
 * 2) Orphan and delete these, as should have happened when the templates were renamed.

Personally, I favour the latter course of action. We also need to look through earlier logs, to see how long this has been going on :( Grutness...wha?  11:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * PS - there were two other which had been orphaned (Muni-stub and Leaf-nosed-bat-stub), which I did delete. Grutness...wha?  12:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I suggest keeping the NorthernMarianaIslands-radio-station-stub and even-toed-ungulate-stub redirects, since those are really in the "have to stop and think about it" category as to which is the "good" and which is the "bad" version. And if you haven't memorised the NGs, it's in the realm of "wild guess".  leaf-nosed-bat-stub I'd put in the same bracket, in fact.  In general I'd suggest that if the redirect is sufficiently "bad" that deletion is required, this be mentioned explicitly in the discussion, since "rename by default means delete" is probably not quite the gold standard in transparency.  If you might not like the closer's interpretation of the sense of the discussion, remove the room for same.  3K- and Afro- I'm going to speedy, though, on the basis that they objectively truly suck, lots.  Korean- is probably somewhere in between.  On the issue iof whether's there's lots, I could generate an exhaustive list from the toolserver db.  Since the number of "good" redirects runs into the hundreds if not the thousands, sifting through the complete list is likely not to be a trivial task.  Alai (talk) 03:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Probably simple enough to report them when we find them, rather than doing a massive time-consuming search. As to the interpretation of the discussion, it's worth noting that usually if the redirects are to be kept that's noted when the discussions are closed. Deletion of the redirects still seems to be the default option. You're right that it's probably worth specifying explicitly though. Grutness...wha?  00:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * FWIW, I emptied out the NorthernMarianaIslands-radio-station-stub and NorthernMarianas-radio-station-stub has all six AM/FM licensed stations (there's also a shortwave station without even an article), so I doubt we need worry too much about new stub articles for this one, so delete the redirect. Caerwine Caer’s whines 03:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Mop up the mess (Orphan and delete). Also inform the closing admins, add clear instructions to main template for this namespace. JERRY talk contribs 02:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The warning message for Korean-cuisine-stub is embarrassing. Can some admin please remove it? This shouldn't warrant as much debate as even-toed ungulates or Northern Mariana Islands radio stations. Heroeswithmetaphors (talk) 08:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It looks like Even-toed-ungulate-stub has been retagged, this time with a discussion of the redirect, notwithstanding the result in September (rename to eventoedungulate-stub, keeping redirect - which it appears was implemented). There doesn't appear to be any new discussion however, unless this is it.  So what's up? This tag is applied to a large number of stubs and shouldn't be deleted.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 17:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that I understand why this is a problem. Why wouldn't you use a redirect?--Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I do see the problem with the deletion debate, three different votes and the closer picked one and didn't state a reason or sign the close, that's bad; but that's not the issue I'm concerned with directly.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * FWIW, the reason why the redirect was tagged is that it's standard practice in stub naming to use hyphens to indicate a subtype - that is, Korean-cuisine-stub was moved to Korea-cuisine-stub (taking the usual noun form) as an acceptable subtype of cuisine-stub. Even-toed-ungulate-stub, by that naming convention, would be a subtype of toed-ungulate-stub. Eventoed-ungulate-stub makes sense (since there is the possibility of an ungulate-stub, even though that stub type doesn't currently exist) whereas the version with the extra hyphen doesn't. It's also usual practice to delete redirects which do not conform to the naming standards, as they lead to extra confusion among non-regular stub-sorters as to whether there is a standard naming pattern, making it harder for them to tell whether there is an existing stub type (if there appears to be a pattern, it makes it far easier to predict what an existing stub template will be named). For that reason, it was until recently standard practice for a rename debate here to implicitly mean "rename and delete the redirect formed from the renaming". It is only in the last month or two (largely since this debate) that the deletion of the redirect has been made more explicit in votes, since some people closing debates were unaware that redirects should have been deleted (hence this debate in the first place). That also might explain the patently bizarre closing of the first debate on even-toed-ungulate-stub. There was no mention of keeping the redirect, and the implication was therefore that it should have been deleted, but whoever closed the debate decided to unilaterally declare that it should be kept. Grutness...wha?  23:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for the explanation of the naming convention, I wasn't clear on that issue. It would seem that the problem here though is that the ungulates are not "eventoed" nor are they "even toed" but they are in fact "even-toed".  See Even-toed ungulate and the category is  and even, so removing the redirect could cause some confusion.  I would suggest this is a case where WP:IAR should apply with respect to the convention.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 03:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * And for the record, there are plenty of odd-toed ungulate stubs, they're just all (or almost all) in so there is no need for the higher level stub cat except for completeness/form.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 03:54, 12 February 2008 (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.