Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2011/September/11

Tv 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 discussion was Rename all - retain TV- names as redirects, delete the last. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:44, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Three differently named TV stubs I found for renaming: Standard naming for TV stubs is -tv- so this is just a case of putting all the ducks in line. First two were moved from the proposed name to the current name and the final one I created a redirect for in January but for some reason I don't remember, didn't bring it here. Rename, leaving redirects. SeveroTC 20:59, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * TV-char-stub → Tv-char-stub
 * TV-prog-stub → Tv-prog-stub
 * Television-award-stub → Tv-award-stub
 * Support. No opinion either way as to whether to keep the "TV-" ones as redirects, but having a "television-" redirect may be overkill. Grutness...wha?  23:33, 11 September 2011 (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.

and

 * 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 discussion was Upmerge, without prejudice against recreating once there are enough stubs (current policy says 60). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Two unproposed and seriously undersized categories (less than ten stubs between them. While we will eventually need these, no doubt, we certainly don't need them yet, so upmerge, with no prejudice against re-creation once they reach the 60-stub threshold. Grutness...wha?  00:48, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * We have categories like this for every decade. Only a few players from the 1990s have made their MLB debuts at this point, but many more will in the coming years, as you say. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:11, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * That's exactly my point. There aren't the required threshold number of articles yet for these two stub types - which is why one of them had an upmerged template (the other, the template was created at the same time as the categories). Until there are that required number, they need to be upmerged, as explained at WP:Stub and WP:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub rationales. Grutness...wha?  03:01, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Upmerge - no harm in having the templates, but no point in having seriously undersized categories so they can be deleted but without prejudice on recreation when proposed when they eventually reach threshold (i.e. 60 articles). SeveroTC 08:10, 11 September 2011 (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.