Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/May/9

Ntpapyrus-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 delete

Unproposed, cryptically named, no stub category (not even a redlink), unlikely to ever reach threshold, and adequately covered by other templates. Not needed. Delete. Grutness...wha?  02:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't know I had to propose, have done so now. Happy to have it deleted and start with a better name. NewTestamentPapyrusStub seems a little cumbersome, those who work with the New Testament know it as NT, hence Ntpapyrus stub. What is threshold? There are more than 100 NT papyruses, is that what you mean? 100 is not enough? Most importantly though, I simply don't know a stub category like it, or I'd have used one. Suggestions: papyrology stub, biblical manuscripts stub, new testament stubs. All these seem good, I can think of hundreds of articles for all of them, then again, this is my full time occupation in real life. Cheers. Alastair Haines 15:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Threshold is 60 existing stub articles with the designated scope (see WP:STUB). What about a broader NewTestament-stub / ?  "NT" seems much too cryptic and ambiguous in general usage.  Alai 16:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification, indeed there are not 60 existing stubs (though I'll be producing almost that many). The max number would be about 100, so this stub definitely does have to go. I'll use the manuscript stub for the time being. Others will work out if we need to subdivide that class. Cheers. Alastair Haines 17:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Alternatively, you could have an upmerged template (that is, one that feeds into an existing category, or a new one with a broader scope, as above (New Testament, Bible in general, all MSs of that era, etc). But if so, do make the template name less mysterious.  Alai 03:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete; already covered by manuscript-stub, and the creator is OK with deletion (per discussion on Proposals page). Her Pegship  (tis herself) 19:17, 10 May 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.

1948 Palestine-geo 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 delete

Unproposed. Upmerged, but astonishingly badly named. A very bad idea, too - geo-stubs are always split by current national boundaries - the reason for which should be obvious (consider a 2000-year old settlement in Croatia, and how many different stubs it might require). Delete. Grutness...wha?  02:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Strong Keep Please see the talk page for the template itself and the WikiProject Palestine page. The template is to be used only for villages listed at List of villages depopulated during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. The geographical region as this time was known as Palestine, it is dated appropriately and the byline circumscribes its application. This was created to replace Template:Palestine-geo-stub which is currently locked and is not appropriate as is for placement on articles of this kind since the byline reads ''This geography of the Palestinian National Authority article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.'' These are depopulated villages that no longer exist and if they did, most would be located inside what is now Israel. (PS: I made the template and did not propose because I wasn't aware that I had to. Please forgive the oversight and reconsider this proposal for deletion.) Tiamut 02:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The villages in question - or the locations where they were, are currently within the boundaries of israel, and as such israel-geo-stub is the only appropriate geo-stub for them. Separate geo-stubs based on specific time are completel;y inappropriate as I pointed out in my nomination. If you want a stub type for articles relating to historical entities within palestine, i would suggest proposing a Palestine-hist-stub. The current stub type, thouygh, should most definitely and certainly be deleted. Grutness...wha?  02:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Grutness, can you create a Palestine-hist-stub? I think that is the best solution.  --Abnn 03:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I've proposed one at WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2007/May. Hopefully there shouldn't be any opposition to one. Feel free to add any comments there. Grutness...wha?  05:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete I think Grutness' point was that geo-stub tagging should be limited to the two governments currently extant in that area, as trying to then document other historical layers will only end in dozens of templates that will quickly become devoid of any utility. The category will suffice in allowing organisation.  Tewfik Talk 02:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Consider my point re Croatia. A precedent set by a stub for the boundaries of a country at some point in the past would create the possibility of one village having Croatia-geo-stub, Yugoslavia-geo-stub, GrossDeutschReich-geo-stub, AustriaHungary-geo-stub, Illyria-geo-stub, Pannonia-geo-stub, RomanEmpire-geo-stub, Ostrogoth-geo-stub, VeniceRepublic-geo-stub, HungarianKingdom-geo-stub and Byzantium-geo-stub. It would become unmanageable very quickly. I realise some special circumstances are involvd with the situation re:Palestine, but they aren't sufficient to create this type of precedent. As I pointed out, there is nothing to stop you proposing a Palestine-hist-stub for articles relating to the history of Palestine, which could be used as an addiional stub template on this type of article. Grutness...wha?  03:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom and the excellent example of why this is a bad idea. Isarig 04:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete per above.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 04:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete per Grutness. Valentinian T / C 16:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete per nom and Tewfik. 6SJ7 20:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, per the "recognised boundaries of modern states" convention. (On which basis, some of the Israel-geo-stubs are rather... iffy.)  And the naming guidelines.  Alai 16:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Grutness. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 16:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Bulldog123 03:52, 13 May 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.

Canadian-country-band-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

Unproposed. Upmerged, and maybe a reasonable idea, but the name used doesn't follow the naming guidelines. Rename to Canada-country-band-stub. Grutness...wha?  02:09, 9 May 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.