Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2008/August/31

Kites-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 upmerge to aviation stubs

Taking the opportunity with a lull of new stub creations to bring some here from the backlog at WP:WSS/D - from April 2007 in fact. In the last 16 months, this has climbed to 10 stubs. Consensus at WP:WSS/D was rename as Kite-stub and upmerge, which I support, and recommend deleting the currently poorly-named template name rather than keeping it as a redirect. Grutness...wha?  00:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Upmerge to where? Alai (talk) 03:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Mmmm. good question. "Upmerge" is what the original comments at WSS/D said - I only reports 'em here. Kites cover a wide area, from toys to scientific tools... but I think we couldn't go too far wrong if we upmerged it to, given that Kite is in , double-stubbing with toy-stub or others where appropriate. Grutness...wha?  00:41, 14 September 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.


 * 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 upmerge As above, from WP:WSS/D in April 2007. In the last 16 months, this has climbed to 16 stubs, but it does have a subcat. Consensus at WP:WSS/D was upmerge, which I weakly support, as it does now have that subcat. Grutness...wha?  00:58, 31 August 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.


 * 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 upmerge Methodism-stub to Christianity stubs, keep bishops category

As above, from WP:WSS/D in April 2007. In the last 16 months, this has climbed to just nine stubs, but it does have a subcat. Consensus at WP:WSS/D was upmerge, which I support - even with a subcat nine is just too few. Grutness...wha?  00:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * There are 112 articles (plus the template) in the subcategory (for Methodist bishops). Definitely don't upmerge the subcat.  (Note the subcat is also a subcat of Category:Bishop stubs.)
 * Nor do I think upmerging this group makes any sense. The next level up is Category:Christian denomination stubs, and only one of the articles in this group belongs there.  So you'd have to go up two levels to Category:Christianity stubs to do an upmerge.  And I can tell you from experience that that level is a useless level for finding topics to work on, as the field is too broad.  One of my primary contributions to the Christianity wikiproject during Q2 '08 was stub-sorting out of that category, which is why I have the stub-tree for it (as of April) documented on both the computers from which I regularly edit Wikipedia.  The methodism wikiproject seems to be fairly quiet at the moment, but that could change again in the future.  GRBerry 02:43, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * There's no suggestion of upmerging the subcategory - only itself, which with nine stubs is simply too sparse. Of those nine stubs, one (List of bishops of the United Methodist Church) can quite happily go into, and the other eight would not be out of place in . As is always the case with such sparse categories connected with dormant WikiProjects, upmerging now would not prevent re-creating the category if the WikiProject became more active and more stubs were created/marked. Grutness...wha?  06:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. This is very small, but if we bear in mind the subcat and the WPJ, it's not far off normative levels.  This could be "made forcibly viable" by upmerging the bishops, which might serve the Methodism project, but would be counter-productive for sorting the Christian bishops as a whole, so I lean towards cutting it some (additional) slack.  Alai (talk) 01:22, 12 September 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.


 * 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 upmerge As above, from WP:WSS/D in April 2007. In the last 16 months, this has climbed to 34 stubs, still substantially undersized. Consensus at WP:WSS/D was upmerge, which I support. Grutness...wha?  00:58, 31 August 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.

2000s-indie-rock-single-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 upmerge

As above, from WP:WSS/D in April 2007. In the last 16 months, this has had only one stub, and the category is redundant with the equivalent stub type for songs. Consensus at WP:WSS/D was send to SFD. My prognosis? Delete. Grutness...wha?  00:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * But what a single it is! (Also a little long to be a stub, though.)  This is something we'll be creating soon enough, given the inexorable rise of the singles, songs, and albums.  We also have separate hierarchies for singles and songs (as I've pointed out before), so it's not "redundant", unless you're going to suggest smooshing the two together wholesale.  Upmerge on size grounds, strong keep of template.  Alai (talk) 01:18, 12 September 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.