Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2008/December/10

footballer-unknown-status /

 * 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, but reformat to make more obviously not a stub template

This one has been around for over a year and while it has the requisite 60 stubs, it is improperly formed and unclear on use. Does anyone know anything about this?--Thomas.macmillan (talk) 21:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * works like a stub template and category pairing but Reading it an article of any length could be tagged with the template and not necessarily be out of place so I don't know that we can deal with it here or wether it needs to go to TFD/CFD. May be worth contacting the creators/relevent wikiproject. Waacstats (talk) 23:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. This template seems to be attempting to do two things at once - stub articles and indicate that they have unknown status. The stub part of that work is already covered by footy-bio-stub (as with anything of "unknown status", the base stub type is used); the tagging as 'unknown status" is better dealt with by a different form of cleanup template (such as Missing information). Also, as pointed out, there's nothing in the template that says that it is actually for stubs. Grutness...wha?  00:19, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Reformat. Actually, on second glance, this doesn't really appear to be a stub template at all. I'd recommend reformatting it slightly to make it clear that it's not a stub type - making it look more like Missing information or other similar cleanup templates. Grutness...wha?  00:36, 11 December 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.

UK-Atlantic-stub and UK-Atlantic-geo-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 both

Both created a long time ago (by me, IIRC) as stopgap measures. All of the UK's Atlantic territories have their own templates now, and - in the case of the geography ones - have had for a long time. Neither of these is used any more, and the term "United Kingdom Atlantic territory" was largely a fudged one - there's no formal grouping of these territories, and no permcat equivalents. Will be worth keeping the categories for a while longer, as there are a couple of upmerged templates in each, but the templates have now outlived their usefulness and can go. Grutness...wha?  01:14, 10 December 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.