Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/June/15

Remaining subcats of

 * 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 do not rename

Per rationale below: to correspond to parent, and we don't sort people by religion, but by religious notability. Alai 23:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Wouldn't. "Religion-bio-stub" be better? Aka "Islam-bio-stub". "Jewish" particularly can be problematic. -- Cat chi? 17:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Poorly thought out proposal. The present names are more meaningful than the proposed ones. The new stub names will require the removal of these stubs from biographies of perosn identified by them but not noted for being religious. Are new stubs proposed for the non-religious?--Redaktor 22:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Keep it simple. (No offense to Alai, I respect his work and gave him a barnstar for his efforts, but just wanted to drop this phrase in because its so fitting). Baka man  01:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose - too long.--D-Boy 18:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose  --Bohater 12:50, 23 June 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.

→

 * 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 do not rename

This type's seeing what looks to me like excessive use ("this person's a known Christian"), and I wonder if the category name is partly to blame. Rename to match the immediate parent,. Alai 16:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Change is not consistent with other subcats.  Also, it is unclear what the proposed title means.  Does the nominator think only the "religious" (those who have taken Holy Orders) should be included?  I don't understand what Alai expects to accomplish. Mdotley 21:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Your first point is well taken: other nominations imminent.  It seems perfectly clear to me, and I don't think people would argue that the parent would be read in the manner you suggest, which is far from a natural one.  What I hope to accomplish (my expectations I try to keep in check) is less scope-creep:  Diane-Louise Jordan is obviously a biography about a Christian, but hardly about a "Christian religious figure", or even one notable in connection with Christianity.  Alai 23:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with the proposal that a change is necesary but I don't agree with the proposed change "Christian religious biography stubs" sounds weird. HOw about something like "Christianity related biography stubs"? -- Cat chi? 17:21, 20 June 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.

Peru-arch-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/re-scope and upmerge

Unproposed and badly misnamed. Arch-stub was the term used for architecture stubs until earlier this year, when it was deemed to be too ambiguous. This shows in what way it can be - this should, if kept, be Peru-archaeology-stub, and should have been pointed at. However, the category is not needed, and splitting by individual countries when we haven't even really begun to split by continent is strange and potentially difficult for editors. Pre-Columbian peoples spread far across current borders, so a more logical early split would have been SouthAm-archaeology-stub. It's worth noting that between them and  have fewer than 50 articles in total - so there's little chance of the required 60 current stubs for a separate category. A split of by continent is probably about due (Europe has already been split out, and there are 430 other stubs), but by country? Not for quite a while yet, at least not for South America. Delete the category, rename/rescope the template to (a possibly upmerged) SouthAm-archaeology-stub. Grutness...wha?  01:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename and upmerge, per nominator rationale. Alai 16:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep & Comment There might be a little of confusion between "Archaeology" and "archaeological site". The Peru-arch-stub spceifies archaeology, for articles about its science(the study of human cultures-inPeru), developments, scientists, and if possible arch sites located in Peru. And also because of the huge amount of arch sites located in present-day Peru this stub should be kept (compared to other SouthAm countries). -- Andersmusician  $  15:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete only 6 articles.... No need for a stub type for that. Use the generic one please. -- Cat chi? 21:08, 23 June 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.