Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2009/January/15

Europe-museum-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

When was created, it was deliberately created as a parent-only type, taking stubs from country-specific templates. Unfortunately, an editor has decided that a europe-specific template is needed, despite the fact that it would get virtually no use (are there any museums in Europe that aren't in a European country?), and was deliberately not created earlier. Delete. Grutness...wha?  00:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Changing to Keep for the time being, but renominate at a later date. This will at least make a useful template temporarily, until such time as templates are made for all separate countries. The long-term aim should still be to make it redundant to individual country-specific templates, however. Grutness...wha?  23:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of museum stubs that deal with museums that are in Europe, so "no use" is a ridiculous claim. Are all European museums in France, Greece, or the UK? I think not. This was simply common sense- I will populate the category if you should wish; you might do so yourself if deleting weren't the easier decision. I have a user name, you know, and as such I find your tone offensive.  Litho  derm  00:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no intention of deleting the category. There is an intention of only of deleting the template because it was specifically NOT to be created. At one time WP:WSS did create continent-wide templates, but we found out the hard way that these were not useful, and that it saved a considerable amount of work to create templates by country and not by continent. Once such templates are created, this template will indeed have no use, except for those museums which are in more than four countries in Europe (since up to four individual stub templates may be used on an article). I would be interested to know how many stub articles we have on museums in five or more European countries.
 * Why don't you indicate that in the category? What was I supposed to think of this:

when the link to the template was red? Shouldn't it have been something more like this:

Not everyone spends all of their time here tagging stubs. If you don't make these things clearer in the categories, you're just setting yourself up to be misunderstood. As I have said below, I will follow your arcane procedures in the future, if I sort any more stubs at all.  Litho  derm  19:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Gah. That damned bot that changed the category headings is a menace. Most of them are picked up with Special:Missing templates - somehow that one must have got missed. In any case, the box above that one says:


 * ... which should have made it clear that new templates should be proposed, to confirm that there are no concerns with them. Grutness...wha?  22:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * If you had proposed this template, it would have been turned down flat, since the standard current way of creating such templates for a continental category is to create specific by-country templates. Check other similar categories, such as, and the subcategories of . Similar splits have recently been proposed to extend the by-country stub types for films, scientists, business biographies, and military personnel, among others. These do in one or two cases have euro-specific templates, but these were old, early templates and are no longer used on many or any articles. Instead, standard practice now is NOT to have such templates, since they eventually create more work, as they inevitably mean an article will be restubbed twice rather than just once. If you wish to propose country-specific templates, then they will be far more useful and save considerable amounts of work both for yourself and for other stub sorters. Certainly the idea of populating the category with this template is an extremely foolish one, as every article that is marked with it will have to have it removed and replaced by a country-specific template as soon as such templates are proposed and approved - something likely to happen in the not-too-distant future. As to my tone, I don't know why you would consider it offensive - it would surely have been far more offensive if I had called you out by name and said here who it was who had created this, rather than leave your name anonymous. It also made no difference to the nomination who had created it, so why name you? Grutness...wha?  12:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I've only gotten through K so far, but there are more than enough articles in the category to justify keeping the template.  Litho  derm  01:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * PLEASE STOP!!! This is not the way to add stub templates to articles on specific things within one country in a continent, as all of these are - all you are doing is making a ton of extra work for yourself that you would be better off expending elsewhere. In cases like museums - and similar structures - we rarely if ever have continent specific templates. We have country specific templates, and a range of these should be proposed (indeed, they would likely be speediable, as similar templates have already been made for several countries. Unless you can show me good evidence that any single one of the museums marked is in more than one country, there is no need for a continent specifiic template and - as pointed out in this nomination - one was specifically not made when the category was approved. All you are doing by adding this template to articles is creating extra work for yourself, by adding what will only bee a temporary stub type to each article. Consider this - Johnbod has suggested a German stub type. Fine, one would very likely be approved quickly, since splitting by country is a standard way of splitting museum stubs. Any German museum stubs you have marked with Europe-museum-stub will have that removed and Germany-museum-stub added. Any you do not mark will similarly have Germany-museum-stub added. The only difference between the two is that the work you expended on the first one would have been a waste of time. Grutness...wha?  12:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * BTW, even if no other templates were created, you've already wasted a considerable amount of your time - quite a number of the stubs you marked with Europe-museum-stub are now correctly marked with Spain-museum-stub or Belgium-museum-stub. If you'd used the existing country-specific types in the first place, you';d have saved some unnecessary effort. Grutness...wha?  12:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Why weren't these categorized under Category:European museum stubs? I might have found them, had they been categorized correctly. I support your proposal as outlined WP:STUBSORT. Please stop treating me like a criminal- had I done nothing, then, well, nothing would have been done, and the country-specific stubs would not have been created. Why was there a redlink to the template in Category:European museum stubs, yet no explanation of why-- and why must this be so arcane? I understand the procedure now, and will follow it in the future.  Litho  derm  19:35, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not treating you like a criminal - I'm simply trying to stop you making extra work for yourself and for others. Yes, you're right that nothing might have been done - now, though it would have been at a future datee. And there's more than one wway to get work moving on a project. Pointing out the problem at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting would have had the same effect but without much of the work or any of the conflict. The redlink I've explained above. As to why some of those stubs hadn't been sorted over yet, there are 150 stub sorters - there are some 500,000 stubs. Have a look at the project's to-do list. It should be easy to work out why some haven't yet been sorted. Grutness...wha?  22:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks like a Keep to me, though a German category would remove a good number. But I never understand stubs. Johnbod (talk) 03:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * And indeed a German category - and a German template - would have been a very good proposal. Far better than a continent-wide template which will be redundant as soon as country-specific templates are proposed and created. Grutness...wha?  11:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Do we need categories and/or templates for all European countries? There is likely to be a long wait for that. Johnbod (talk) 13:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Templates, yes - that's the eventual aim, same as has already been done with generic, geography, and some other stub types. Categories, very unlikely. Most will remain upmerged. Grutness...wha?  22:47, 16 January 2009 (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.