Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2008/March/15

'bassist' cleanup

 * 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 convert main template into a "please don't use", redirect other two to it; keep bassist stubbs cat, delete two national ones

This is essentially a procedural nomination, following on from recent changes in "facts on the ground". Firstly, the following have been emptied: So unless they're going to be repopulated, by reverting the split into "bass guitarists" and "double bass players", they should be deleted as redundant. If that split is reverted, we should instead get rid of the long-standing, which has been semi-duplicating these for a couple of years now. Then there's the matter of their populating templates: If the term "bassist" is regarded as being inclusive of both, we should probably avoid using it to populate the bass guitarists, and either duplicate it, or turn it into a "football-style" deprecation message. If one thinks it primarily means the strumming faction, they might reasonably be kept as redirects. Alai (talk) 19:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * bassist-stub
 * UK-bassist-stub
 * US-bassist-stub


 * The cats were emptied by changing where the templates point to, so they could easily be repopulated, as there are still a lot of articles using the templates. Given the ambiguity in the term bassist, having the templates apply to just bass guitarists is not appropriate. Caerwine Caer’s whines  20:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The question is not whether they could be repopulated, but whether they should be repopulated. And as I say, if we have "bassists in general" types, we should not also have a "bass guitarists" type, which it would entirely subsume.  Alai (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Keep/delete/modify, per the following:


 * Convert the Bassist-stub template into a "please don't use" one, like on China-geo-stub, and turn the other two into redirects to it.
 * Keep as a parent-only type, delete the other two.

It might be worth considering changing the "please don't use" templates to add some sort of glaring message like when an editor fails to subst a cfd or afd template. Grutness...wha?  23:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What Grutness said. Her Pegship  (tis herself) 22:17, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Per Grutness. Stifle (talk) 23:53, 29 March 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.

Three cats for one template

 * 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 template and ; delete other cats

We have an unproposed Arab-cuisine-stub which given the existence of a long standing corresponding permanent category is probably worth keeping as an upmerged template at the very least. However, during creation, he managed to create three separate categories (which matches the permanent category),  (which matches our general preference for adjective forms), and the one which the template currently feeds into  which breaks the stub category naming guidelines by using stub instead of stubs. Clearelt the last needs to be deleted, and at least one of the other two need to go as well, and possibly both if this stub doesn't meet the 60 stub threshold. I have no preference as for which of the two to keep if it does grow to threshold. Caerwine Caer’s whines 18:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC) The stub has grown to 35 references as I am writing this. I am sure it can achieve the necessary 60 references it needs to stay on. It just needs a little more time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sufitul (talk • contribs)
 * Delete and  as not following the permcat or article.  Delete  if it fails to hit 60, or gain a WPJ, and some articles.  Alai (talk) 20:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete/delete unless..., per Alai. Grutness...wha?  23:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If we "upmerge" it, i.e., keep the template, and delete the category, the latter can be recreated later, without prejudice. So worry not on that score.  Alai (talk) 16:21, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Which category should we keep? I understand that "Arabic cuisine stubs" is the preferred version however, the "Arab cuisine stubs" matches the permanent article (Arab cuisine) and the stubs template. I am really in the mist with regards to this. 86.122.95.117 (talk) 20:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No, we should prefer, for exactly those reasons. If the usage "Arabic cuisine" would be better, we should start by renaming those.  Alai (talk) 01:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Update: the has grown to 62 stubs references.Sufitul (talk) 20:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Fine and dandy! Alai (talk) 01:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That makes things easier - it's now a keep but rename (i.e., move the articles to the correctly named, and delete the others). Grutness...wha?  00:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I deleted one category and edited the stub template to feed into, however I have not yet deleted  because not all the stub references have migrated to the correct category. I have done this yesterday, and so far only 30 out of over 70 have transferred. Any ideas? Sufitul (talk) 12:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Patience, young Jedi. You must learn patience!  Seriously tho, sometimes it takes time for the categories to correct themselves after a template change.  The old category is now empty. Caerwine Caer’s whines  18:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * FWIW, Sufitul, there is often a bit of a lag in the servers with this sort of thing. Sometimes you can speed the transfer process up by doing a null edit on the template, but usually it's unnecessary and only a matter of waiting. Grutness...wha?  23:49, 23 March 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.