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

/

 * 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 per WP:MFD

Weirdly, this is in user space. Horribly misnamed - not least of which by its reference to "stubs" when there is only one current SMB stub. Even within the realms of games, SMB would be more likely to refer to something else. The main only as ten articles and - bizarrely - a portal. The template may need to defer to WP:MfD, since it isn't actually a template. The same is true of the one below. Note that the two of them also appear as subpages of User:Masky/Templates/Stubs, which will also need deletion oif these two go, but - again - that may need doing though MfD. Grutness...wha?  00:10, 16 March 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 delete

Possibly speediable, maybe BJAODN'able, too. - same problems as above, except that this one is unused. Grutness...wha?  00:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm fully in favour of speedying the category (and the above one, too), but I suggest leaving the template alone, since it's in user space, unless the user in question persists in doing inappropriate things with it. (... like transcluding it into articles, and having it feed into non-user categories).  BTW, you're ten minutes late,,,  Alai 01:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the SMB one is transcluded into an article... and I had trouble loading/saving the page, which is why I was late :) Grutness...wha?  23:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, but I think transclusion of a user page into the article space is itself "speedily fixable". Alai 04:23, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I wonder why everyone is trying to sabotage my Wikipedia projects. I worked really hard for them. It went from my quests to my templates, and from my SMB Portal and WikiProject to this. Why, why, why??? :(
 * I'm assuming it was Masky asked that - it isn't an attempt to sabotage your projects, any more than your creating of "pseudo-stub templates" is an attempt to sabotage the stub-sorting project. It's just that stub templates aren't created in user-space, and have a serious purpose that a "LOL-stub" doesn't fit in with. Also, there are specific guidelines for their creation, such as having non-ambiguous names and having enough stubs that can use them (60) to be useful. In the case of SMB-stub, neither of these requirements is met, and in the case of LOL-stub, well, it hardly fits in with the serious purpose of stub types. There are places on Wikipedia where "LOL" pages are listed, such as Unusual articles - you don't need a stub template for them. Grutness...wha?  01:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW - I'm copying the following from the MFD debate on the SMB portal and related pages, rather than re-typing some of my comments - it might provide a little more of an idea why I proposed these for deletion:
 * Why delete my LOL Stub and Stub Template page? It's not like the LOL Stub will send Wikipedia to its flames. Masky (Talk |  contribs) 12:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * By itself, no, but consider this. if one person has their own user stub types, then sooner or later other editors will want them. Soon we'd get into the sort of mess we got into with userboxes. And userboxes are there simply as a bit of fun, whereas stub types serve an important purpose in the editing of Wikipedia's articles. That is why stub templates are fairly closely controlled on WP, to discourage the creation of even ones which are of borderline use within template space. A gradual proliferation of frivolous stub templates or user-space stub templates would defeat the purpose of stub sorting. And you cannot guarantee that this would prove to be a precedent for just that sort of proliferation. Grutness...wha?  00:22, 21 March 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.