Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2008/August/9

Hawaii-royal-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 keep; now contains 146 items

Unporoposed, and used on one article. There are a few stubs for members of the Hawaiian royal family (for whon the parent category is, not, as the stub category suggests, ), but these are currently happily coped for by the hardly-oversized. A case could be made for a separate stub type to cover all things relating to native Hawai'i (though what to call it might be problematic), but there's certainly no need at present for the nominated stub type. Delete, or at the very least upmerge to. Grutness...wha?  02:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep because articles in the category bumped up 25-50 articles. --frogger3140 (talk) 23:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Huh? Since when did still being a non-standard stub type with a below-threshold number of articles indicate a "speedy keep"? This is still more deletable than keepable. Grutness...wha?  00:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

There seems to be enough articles to warrant this stub type. All the other royal stubs are at -royal-stub, such as UK-royal-stub or Asia-royal-stub, so I don't see the problem with Hawaii-royal-stub. If there is a problem with it matching up with the permcat, then maybe the permcat needs to be renamed. ~ Amalas rawr  =^_^=  18:37, 19 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.