Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2008/April/22

Pitt-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 del & create Pennsylvania-university-stub

Unproposed, and with numerous problems.
 * It was agreed recently that stubs relating to universities should be split by state/region, not by individual university (as such, a Pennsylvania-university-stub would be the correct stub type to have proposed)
 * There is no guaranteed size for this category; unless it can be shown to have 60 stubs, a separate stubcat should not have been created (make that 30 stubs - there is a dedicated wikiproject)
 * There seems to be some confusion, given the categorisation of the template, as to whether this is actually a Stub-Class assessment template (in which case it should have been named as such).
 * The template name is, frankly, awful. This is not for either of the William Pitts, not for Pitt Island, or, in fact, for anything called "Pitt", other than in colloquial usage. As such, it is beyond merely being ambiguous but is actually misleading.

If the intention was for a talk page assessment banner template, then name it and its category as such (Stub-Class UPittsburgh or similar). If not, then Delete this and create an upmerged Pennsylvania-university-stub. Grutness...wha?  01:38, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Seems like the UPittsburgh WikiProject already have a talk-page banner, so it was miscategorisation on the part of the creator of this template. At least it makes the discussion here simpler. Grutness...wha?  01:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Creator of the stub here. (via IP, since I'm on a different computer w/o password saved). If it fails the standards, then go ahead and delete it, that's fine. I was being bold and helping out a new wikiproject and trying to modify existing stub templates to help the cause. But please save your vitriol from the innocent and apparently improper stub template.


 * And, by the way, "Pitt" is an accurate and official alternate description of "University of Pittsburgh." For example, see WP:PITT or Image:Pitt-Script.svg or Image:PittPanthers.png or official protocol or google. "UPitt" or "U of Pitt" are never accurately used to describe the University of Pittsburgh. That would be mixing nicknames on the order of describing University of Mississippi as "U of Ole Miss." User:Shizzy9989


 * Although that is indeed an accurate alternative, stub templates tend not to use vernacular forms (which "Pitt" is, not to mention a bit ambiguous as mentioned). And don't mind Grutness -- s/he tends to sound mean when s/he's just being meticulous. Cheers, Her Pegship  (tis herself) 00:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * He :) Yeah, sorry if I sounded mean. Note though that I never suggested UPitt - I suggested UPittsburgh. UPitt is every bit as confusing a name to people not from Pennsylvania as Pitt would be. As for WP:BOLD, why is it no-one ever reads the bit on that page which stresses that it's aimed mainly at articles and not at templates and categories? Or, for that matter, the bit in WikiProject that talks about proposing stub types? Ah well - I still think that following the idea from a couple of months back of working on a by-state rather than by-university basis will make for fewer tiny stub types and still be useful to groups working on articles about specific universities. Grutness...wha?  00:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Can we first get the Pennsylvania--university-stub working? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 03:08, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Done! Her Pegship  (tis herself) 04:23, 2 May 2008 (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.