Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2008/January/2

Assyrian-stub Category:Assyrian stubs

 * 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 -- Y not? 04:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, stub types are not a substitute to categories. And also delete per WP:NOT. Insistence to use a controversial Assyrian flag implies that this stub template carries a political message. It's scope is most strange. Both history related articles, political parties, TV stations, bio articles and other otherwise unrelated entities are tagged together following a country-stub like structure. This seems to be the intention... Stub type was never proposed and is used on 125 - 2 = 123 articles. Some tagged articles are rather one sentence seemingly created merely to inflate the count (George Francis (Assyrian), Robert D. Biggs, Sargon Dadesho, Assyrians in Russia, Assyrian Evangelical Church, Tyaraye Tribe, Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies...). This template was nominated for deletion twice before: 2007-01-16 (no consensus) and 2007-06-12 (keep). The closing person of the last nomination listed 3 reasons to keep of which at least one (flag thing) has been revert wared over and was eventually restored after a while. -- Cat chi? 21:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Hmm, must be that time of the year again where you become an annoying jerk. You proposed the same thing with this templae last year and it got rejected. This template is very important for WikiProject Assyria. Chaldean (talk) 23:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Actually, stub templates are at best of marginal value to Wikiprojects. Keeping track of articles once found is a task for talk page templates such as WPAP.  As a method of bringing articles to the attention of interested editors, this stub is likely of marginal value, precisely because it does not fall within the usual stub types, and hence unlikely to be applied by anyone not associated with Wikiproject Assyria.  Also the template does get used in non-customary ways on some bio stubs.  For instance, if Robert D. Biggs were an Egyptologist instead of an Assyriologist, he would normally not get the AncientEgypt-stub yet that article was marked with this stub.  However, let's not belabor that point.  Practically every stub category has a few dubious articles attached to it.  The main problem with this stub type is that a large number of these articles appear to have little possibility for expansion.  For example, because of the sparsity of information available for most of the Ancient Assyrian kings, it probably would be best to merge articles for individual kings into articles on dynasties or even kingdoms. Caerwine Caer’s whines  04:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply Whatever information available on ancient Assyrian kings is a merge for discussion topic. In any case, there are new articles created, like current events, modern Assyrians (yes, we still exist) and other Assyrian related issues. This stub fills the purpose of categorizing everything from ancient Assyria (including Babylon, Sumer and Akkad), to modern Assyrians. This stub will still be useful in the future for other purposes than ancient Assyrian kings. It is not limited to ancient Assyrian kings. Also, since when is it not allowed to have a stub category for a wikiproject? &mdash; EliasAlucard (HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!! · contribs) 09:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikiprojects are not allowed to have private stub types. Stub types have solid non-controversial criteria which is exactly the opposite of what you are saying. -- Cat chi? 14:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikiprojects are not allowed to have private stub types. &mdash; Oh really? Well that was a newsflash. Care to point out any Wikipedia policy that explicitly corroborates your claim? Stub types have solid non-controversial criteria which is exactly the opposite of what you are saying. &mdash; This stub type is only controversial if you are against the Assyrian nation calling itself Assyrian, or if you believe that modern Assyrians should not have their own state which would occupy Turkey. Which are you? &mdash; EliasAlucard (HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!! · contribs) 15:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Stub types are the province of WikiProject Stub sorting but that project tries to be amicable with other WikiProjects. Still, they don't automatically get stub types, those some of the guidelines, such as numbers of stub articles are relaxed for them.  Still, the fact remains that stub types are not intended as a primary method of article categorization for Wikiprojects.  They are intended as a method of bringing articles to the attention of knowledgeable editors.  That requires stub types to generally possess two characteristics.  The first is that there be a body of knowledgeable editors that would be able to make use of the stub.  The existence of a Wikiproject of similar scope is generally taken as proof of that.  But the other is that stub sorters and other editors will be able to use it to bring it to their attention.  Placed as it is in the stub hierarchy, that's doubtful at present.  It might improve a little bit if placed in fashion similar to  as a subcat of . Caerwine Caer’s whines  02:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep This is the third time User:White Cat tries to get this stub deleted. His entire agenda for deleting it is a political one. He is against the Assyrian flag; that is the only reason he wants it deleted. This stub is part of WP:WikiProject Assyria, and it fills a very important function for the project. There is no policy whatsoever on Wikipedia that prohibits the Assyrian flag being used for this stub. New Assyria-related articles are constantly created and categorized under this stub category, and it fills a useful function for us who are working with WikiProject Assyria. &mdash; EliasAlucard (HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!! · contribs) 09:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh really. First nomination was not my doing. Why are you insisting on the flag on the template? Numerous people including the closing admin of the second nomination suggested against it. Stub types are supposed to be non-controversial per WP:NOT if nothing else. Wikiprojects can use the talk page of the articles. -- Cat chi? 14:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Why are you insisting on the flag on the template? &mdash; Because it's a stub that points to an ethnic name of an ancient and modern people. As with any stub of this sort, a flag is the most common picture in use for this kind of stub categories. The fact that you absolutely loathe the Assyrian flag does not give you the right to go berserk and nominate the stub for deletion every five seconds. What's it to you if the Assyrian flag is included? Please do tell, why does it bother you to include the Assyrian flag? Don't just state "IT'S CONTROVERSIAL", state specifically why you oppose the Assyrian flag. There is nothing controversial about this flag unless you make it a controversy. &mdash; EliasAlucard (HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!! · contribs) 15:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No ethnicity has a common flag picture. Flags are by nature political. Flag of Assyria belongs to an aspired country. It's use on any modern topic will be a problem for that reason. It is like an endorsement of country status. I believe the flag in question is banned in some countries where Assyrians live.
 * Inclusion of it on Ancient topics will also be a problem because Assyrian flag as article explains was designed in 1968 and adopted it in 1971. Who adopted it is a different question that comes to my mind. The flag of "ancient Assyrians" can be used on articles about "ancient Assyria" and/or "ancient Assyrians". You do not use the modern Italian flag on Roman Empire related articles.
 * No stub template is used to tag both ancient and modern people. Such criteria is too broad. They should be two seperate stub templates at a minimum. Keep history topics to their own stub type seperate from everything else.
 * -- Cat chi? 23:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe the flag in question is banned in some countries where Assyrians live. &mdash; Yes, I believe that's the case in Turkey, no? It couldn't be a coincidence that you speak Turkish and want to delete the stub category because it contains the Assyrian flag? I would even go so far as to call that censorship. &mdash; EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 03:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Conditional keep – Do not use this obviously politically motivated stub for all Syriac-related articles, but only for Assyrian(ist) articles. That is, those articles that deal with the modern Assyrian nation, meaning those Syriacs who consider themselves Assyrians, and carry the Assyrian flag. Perhaps renaming the stub to "Syriac" would be more appropriate. --Benne ['bɛnə] (talk) 13:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I don't have a problem with the flag being removed, if thats whats bothering whitecat. The image can be replaced. Chaldean (talk) 17:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per EliasAlucard. --07fan (talk) 06:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Restrict scope and usage, per Benne. Alai (talk) 03:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete — I recently added a Mesopotamian map to a number of cities of Assyrian antiquity (I roughly define antiquity as the period of history where there is more to learn by digging than by reading preserved texts, which has a strong correlation to the kind of cites available to support the article). For these pages the stub category that would have been most clear to me would be something along the lines of MEast-antiquity-stub.  Few of these articles benefit from being Assyrian stubs; most of the available cites are archaeological.  While I strongly disagree with Cat's persistent "I don't like it" sentiment in putting this nomination forward, I don't see this Assyrian stub template providing much value.  Some voices have said "more articles will be added".  This is losing sight of the purpose here.  We'd be far better off eliminating these stubs by fleshing them out to full articles.  Achieving a large stub population is an achievement of dubious merit.  We're not here to build a stub garden. MaxEnt (talk) 18:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment But it must be understood, this stub template is not only used for ancient Assyria. It is also used for modern Assyrian people, and just about anything related to Assyria and Assyrians. &mdash; EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 18:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Modern Assyrians identify themselves as Assyrians. Assyrians is an ethnic group, thus a Nation. A nation requires a flag. Each nation decides the flag representing their nation. Simple, isn't it? Shalito (talk) 19:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep This is a political nomination. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 04:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Political nomination. /Slarre (talk) 00:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Lol its hilarious how many trolls there are. Oh, and shlama to any fellow Assyrian wikipedians whom I don't know. Please copy and paste this template into your user:page, before someone deletes it. User Assyrian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tourskin (talk • contribs)
 * Delete It is used for two very different things: for ancient Assyrians of 3000 years ago, and for a modern Christian minority. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment How is that a valid reason to delete it? &mdash; EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 05:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The point of categorizing is to put different things in different boxes. This category, however, only muddles things up. Aside from that, only part of modern Assyrians claim the ancient ethnicity, but a significant part rejects this identification, which might make this stub an unnecessarily contentious issue in quite a few articles. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Read Pieter Kuiper. The TriZ (talk) 01:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply No, only a fringe minority within the Assyrian people rejects the Assyrian ethnicity. Don't exaggerate their so called significance. This stub is used for all sorts of Assyrian related topics. The modern ethnic group as well as ancient Assyrian (including generic Mesopotamian topics) topics. This is a generic stub that has no real target, it is not supposed to cover only ancient Assyrian topics. It's also for covering modern Assyrians, modern Assyrian organisations, and so on. But as it seems, Pieter, you want to delete this stub because you are against the modern Assyrian ethnicity. I seriously doubt you'd care otherwise. You've been running around and obsessively deleting everything that is related to Assyrians and our history and most of all, our ethnicity. &mdash; EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 13:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * In articles where this stub is used, wikipedians are invited to "to help reach a consensus on what to do" in a discussion on this page. I responded, I also answered Alucard's question, and it is not me who is obsessed. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 13:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Just as valid as any other ethnicity stub template and category. It should only be deleted if there are no Assyrian stubs. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 08:58, 1 February 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.

Romani-stub Category:Romani stubs

 * 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


 * Delete, stub types are not a substitute to categories. Same as above. Ethnicity based stub types are problematic per WP:NOT. Only 79 - 1 = 78 articles are tagged with this template. Uses the flag of International Romani Union. A good number of tagged articles are not even stubs like the International Romani Union. -- Cat chi? 22:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. This one was approved for creation at WP:WSS/P. Unlike other ethnicity stubs, which often cause problems, a separate stub type for the Roma was seen as useful simply because they do not have a homeland, and as such, specific nation-specific stubs were seen as unlikely to be useful. This one has never been seen to be a problem with regard to soapbox issues, and 78 is well above the standard threshold of 60 for creation of a stub type. If some of the articles are not stubs, then feel free to remove the stub tag from those articles, as is standard practice. A quick scan of the category reveals this to be the case with only a small minority of the articles, however (of the 12 I checked at random, all were stubs). Grutness...wha?  23:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Couldn't wikiproject method of tracking (talk pages) be used. The intention of the stub template seems to be what wikiproject talk templates are doing. Wikiproject talk templates weren't available when this teimplate was WP:WSS/P approved. While I agree that this template is relatively problem free, the existence of it seems to be the rationale to keep or create problematic ethnicity stubs. -- Cat chi? 22:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, yes they were. WikiProject templates are fine when used by wikiprojects for keeping track of all relevant articles, but those articles that are still stubs are also marked with a stub template by WP:WSS/P. In this case, that is exactly what is happening here - these articles are stubs, and they are marked with an apporoved and effective stub template. Unlike most "ethnicity" stubs, no national template would do the job as well here. In any case, a wikiproject template would work fine if there were a wikiproject. There is no WP Roma. And even then, we'd still need some kind of stub template to mark any stub articles.  So basically no, WP templates and stub templates perform different functions, and in this particular case a WP Talk page template wouldn't exist anyway. Grutness...wha?  22:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Romani people carry citizenship of the country they live in. They can be categorized as being from that country. There are many countryless nations. I do not really see a pressing reason for an exeption for this one. -- Cat chi? 14:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * ...and individual Romani people are generally categorised in that way. But what have Romani people got to do with it? This isn't a bio-stub - it's a general stub for culture, history and the like. Most ethnicities - whether of recognised nations or not - are primarily tied to a specific location, and as such it's easy for ethnicity-based stubs to be assigned according to current boundaries. You cannot do that simply with Roma, since the traditions and history are liberally distributed across a dozen or more countries. This makes it different from, say, a Tamil stub or a Han stub, where there are really only two or three countries primarily involved. Grutness...wha?  23:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Nothing wrong or problematic with this stub. It is perfectly useful for Romani articles. &mdash; EliasAlucard (HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!! · contribs) 09:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep same as above, the stub is for topics related to the Romani people. --07fan (talk) 06:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Grutness --Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 11:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Watch And the Violins stopped playing. Maybe you'll see why these people are in fact human beings who deserve to be treated as equals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tourskin (talk • contribs)
 * Keep. Ethnicity-based stubs are indeed problematic, but due to historical circumstances Roma people are an exception. This is similar to e.g. Judaism-bio-stub - it is both ethnicity- and religion-based, but is nevertheless OK for obvious (and somewhat similar) reasons. GregorB (talk) 21:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Just to be clear International Romani Union was a stub when the tag was added. Perhaps we should refrain from improving any of the other Romani stubs for fear of helping your argument? =) TheMightyQuill (talk) 01:18, 3 February 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.