Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2007/September/22

Ancient Romans, Greeks and Egyptians rename

 * 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, keep redirects for now

A short while ago, a template for Ancient Roman politicians was approved but with the form "AncientRome-" rather than "Ancient-Rome-". Rename the rest per this example:
 * Ancient-Rome-stub -> AncientRome-stub
 * Ancient-Rome-bio-stub -> AncientRome-bio-stub
 * Ancient-Rome-myth-stub -> AncientRome-myth-stub
 * Ancient-Rome-mil-stub -> AncientRome-mil-stub
 * Ancient-Greece-stub -> AncientGreece-stub
 * Ancient-Greece-bio-stub -> AncientGreece-bio-stub
 * Ancient-Greece-writer-stub -> AncientGreece-writer-stub
 * Ancient-Egypt-stub -> AncientEgypt-stub

Note: AncientRome-battle-stub and AncientRome-politician-stub already use the proposed format. Valentinian T / C 21:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment: I don't have strong opinions about it, but is it necessary? If only one or two templates don't conform to the others, perhaps they should be be changed back instead. — Zerida 19:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree with Zerida. I admit I'm probably not as familiar with stub convention as I should be, but it seems to me a minor concern best served by making the shortest line between two points.  Ford MF 19:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)  Comment I was unaware there was categorical significance to the hypen placement.  Since AncientRome seems to be functionally different from Ancient-Rome, I think it probably should be moved.  Ford MF 17:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename pr nom. It's not as clearcut as some such cases, but the naming conventions do suggest that using the hyphen indicates that these stub types are subtypes - e.g., Ancient-Rome-myth-stub is a subtype of Rome-myth-stub. In the case of the Egypt and Greece ones, this is less of a problem, since we do have similar stubs for the modern countries - but we're unlikely ever to have some of these types for modern Rome, and it would be misleading to suggest that the ancient ones were as straightforwardly connected if we did. For that reason, losing the extra hyphen does make sense. Grutness...wha?  00:33, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Move per nom and naming guidelines (and the hierarchy); if people are attached to the current names, or feel that a change would cause undue confusion, then keep redirects, at least for the time being.  Alai 02:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom. I agree with above, that the proposed standard format AncientRome or AncientEgypt is better than the format with the extra hyphen. So what if it takes a little extra work? In the long run I think it is the preferred format. Jeff Dahl 17:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not a significant amount of work, just a handful (OK, slightly mutant handful) of moves (and a similar number of bot-runs and deletions, if the one names are to be expurgated, which as I say I wouldn't bother with, personally). Alai 02:09, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename per nom and keep redirects for now. Her Pegship  (tis herself) 17:21, 26 September 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 rename

Propose rename to to match prety much all other bio-stub categories. Waacstats 12:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, by the 'noun phrase' rule-of-thumb. Alai 17:20, 22 September 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.