Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2010/August/2

/Missouri-rail-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 stub type. Ruslik_ Zero 16:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete both - unproposed; unpopulated; category malformed, and only has one of its natural parents, and no permcat; no ther state of the United States has such a category. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:34, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as unused stub sorter (in mainspace, anyway). &mdash; Train2104 (talk· contribs· count· email) 19:03, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - a separate stub separate from road. The only reason that I created the stub is because Misoouri already has a road stub. (Jordan S. Wilson (talk) 12:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC))
 * Delete - An unused stub type. I'm assuming it was intended to be used on articles such as Pacific Railroad, but the Missouri stub cat it not big enough to need splitting and the US rail stub cat has no precedent for being split by state. Dana boomer (talk) 11:35, 21 August 2010 (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.

Road stubs by state

 * 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 merge all. — ξ xplicit  20:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Propose upmerging:
 * to and
 * to and
 * to and
 * to and
 * to and
 * to and

Reason: all these categories are too small (under 20 articles). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:25, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Upmerging seems reasonable. Airplaneman   ✈  15:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Upmerge, seems reasonable. Why not the rest of them too, though? Just in the Midwestern parent cat, Michigan, Minnesota and Indiana are also well under, while Kansas and Ohio are sub-50. In the Northeastern parent cat, Vermont is at 30, and in the Southern cat, Alabama and Maryland are well under. Upmerging all of these as well would not make the parent cats unwieldy, IMHO. Dana boomer (talk) 11:41, 21 August 2010 (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.