Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2009/September/8

UCF-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


 * Unused. Borgarde (talk) 04:07, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as unused. Waacstats (talk) 12:24, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * And as badly named. Grutness...wha?  23:33, 8 September 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.

Pipidae-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 upmerge


 * Used on 1 article. Category definitely not needed. If kept should be upmerged somewhere. Borgarde (talk) 04:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * may turn out to be useful, upmerge to to see if it grows any. Waacstats (talk) 12:26, 8 September 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.

Dravidian-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


 * Unused. Don't know if this is useful. Borgarde (talk) 04:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as unused and possibly confusing. Waacstats (talk) 12:27, 8 September 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.

D&DVG 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 Rename and upmerge, for now at least - current name not kept as a redirect


 * Incorrectly named, used on 3 stubs I think. If kept should be renamed to D&D-videogame-stub per other templates and kept upmerged. Borgarde (talk) 04:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as incorrectly named, had it been at the name suggested I would have said upmerge, but I don't think it is worth creating. Waacstats (talk) 12:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Rename and keep. I think that there are enough articles that could have this template (a lot of the pages in Category:Dungeons & Dragons video games and its subcats are stubs), that having this template is better than both the VG and D&D stub templates on the same article. However, there would be only, say, thirty articles to which it would apply, and I'm not sure about the stub guidelines on this matter. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete—WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals says 60 articles, or 30 if it's primary stub type of a WikiProject. I don't believe we have a project specifically for D&D video games.  Pagra shtak  01:13, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:D&DTF? –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:26, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a task force, not a WikiProject. Although, I don't spend a lot of time around the stub proposal area, so I don't know how that's interpreted. Consider my vote a rename if that's how stubs usually go.  Pagra shtak  01:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Parliamentary-procedure-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


 * This template was proposed in March with a recommendation not to create, it is not used on any articles. Should be deleted. Borgarde (talk) 03:55, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as unused. Waacstats (talk) 12:29, 8 September 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.