Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/June/5

RugbyUnion-stub &rarr; rugbyunion-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 reverse redirect to point to rugbyunion-stub

Per discussion over at WPSS/P, lower case "union" would be more appropriate. Not sure about the hyphenation; feel free to revise as needed. (The category name is OK as is.) Her Pegship  (tis herself) 17:19, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom with the hyphen. I'm used to tagging stubs with a hyphen between words, and "rugby" is a separate word from "union". Placeholder account 00:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename, but definitely without the hyphen. Standard stub-naming practice only uses a hyphen to separate between stub types and their subtypes - thus we do not have New-Zealand-stub, Star-Trek-stub, or Wide-receiver-stub. Rugby union is a unitary sport - it is not a variety of stub relating to unions in general, and given that there is no rugby-stub it should not be hyphenated in that way either (exactly as Rugbyleague-stub is not hyphenated). Note also the existence of NZ-rugbyunion-bio-stub, UK-rugbyunion-bio-stub, Ireland-rugbyunion-bio-stub, and Australia-rugbyunion-bio-stub, all of which correctly avoid the hyphen. Grutness...wha?  00:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note that we did have a rugby-stub before (but deleted it ages ago), and still do have a rugby-bio-stub (which I think we might be able to get rid of without too much effort, too). Alai 15:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename eith out hyphen as per User:Grutness. Waacstats 12:43, 6 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.

Category:New York City Subway stubs &rarr; Category:New York City transportation stubs

 * 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 cat to "New York City transportation stubs", rename template to "NYC-transport-stub", keep redirect "NYCS-stub", delete redirect "NYCT-stub

When the WikiProject New York City Subway expanded its scope to become WikiProject New York City Public Transportation, the stub template NYCS-stub was moved to NYCT-stub, but the corresponding category was not moved. Rename to the above or Category:New York City public transportation stubs. Tinlinkin 03:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I prefer "transportation" over "public transportation." As a current NYC resident, I can assure you there's not much difference, and the shorter term is more user-friendly. Placeholder account 04:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm happy enough with the change, but please note that the only reason why NYCS-stub was acceptable as a template name was because the New York City Subway is a specific organisation/item known by that abbreviation. If the new category name has a lower-case "t", implying that there isn't a unitary organisation involved, the template should probably also be renamed - probably to NYC-transport-stub. Grutness...wha?  05:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename cat to New York City transportation stubs, to correspond in scope to the permcat; rename template (now tagged) per Grutness, keeping NYCS-stub as a redirect (or a separate upmerged template), but getting rid of NYCT-stub as an arbitrary and cryptic abbreviation.  Alai 14:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I have no problem with the renaming of the template. But the template (and category) is supposed to cover transportation over the New York City metropolitan area, including New Jersey and Connecticut. Is this an issue? Tinlinkin 15:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The permcat seems (implicitly) to be scoped to include the MA, so my initial guess would be that the "NYC" naming is OK.  But I'm open to suggestions on that...  Alai 12:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I ask partly because a project member proposed a new stub template that's basically identical to this one and then quickly withdrew the proposal. I can only assume the name of the template was the issue. Tinlinkin 21:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I recently noticed that myself, and in short I don't know. (Could always just ask him, of course.)  But if the permcat is OK, and the stub category follows the permcat, and the template is fairly unambiguously suggestive of the category name, then I'm thinking it's probably OK.  Alai 00:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * That project member was me...I wasn't sure if it was superfluous to the existing one already used for this WikiProject. There are many articles where it could be used (specifically, it might say something like: This article relating to transportation in the New York metropolitan area is a stub). (The existing one seems pretty limited to the City of New York...and this one would cover the entire MTA service area, northern New Jersey, and the Gold Coast of Connecticut (which are all part of the NYMA). Now, I think that a change might be appropriate, because many of the stub articles are simply classified as general stubs. The idea for this came from the Washington Metro stub. Comments? --AEMoreira042281 talk 03:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Washington Metro, of which Washington-Metro-stub is derived from, is a unitary system like the NYCS. As described in that stub's category, it clearly refers to that specific transit system, not necessarily other transit systems that operate in the Washington, D.C. metro area. If needed, metro-NYC-transport-stub may be a suggestion (not too familiar with stub template naming conventions), but I think the name is too superfluous and per Alai, the originally proposed name is implicit in including the NYC metro area. Tinlinkin 03:27, 8 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.