Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/Not deleted/June 2006

Runningbio-stub
Poorly-named duplicate of athletics-bio-stub. On the bright side, it feeds into the same category. Maybe just edit as a redirect? --fuzzy510 20:27, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Running-stub
Covers the exact same things as athletics-stub. Worst of all, however, is that instead of placing these stubs into their own category, it places them into. --fuzzy510 20:19, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * There's more to athletics than running. What about, say, jumping? Conscious 07:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Touche. That was worded poorly on my part, when I was more trying to say that it was clearly a child of athletcs-stub. --fuzzy510 09:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * For one thing, not all running is "athletics" (in the non-US sense, and within the scope of the stub type). For another, these have been SFD'd three times in a little over a month:  is there any chance of some actual breathing space to get this sorted out?  If I were the associated wikiproject, I might feel a tad picked on by this point.  Alai 20:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I completely didn't notice that. Wow, way for me to be completely clueless.  On that note though, can someone from said WikiProject join the discussion so that this can be sorted out instead of us trying to figure it out without their guidance and opinion?  --fuzzy510 23:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I've left them a note; as we're already here, might be a chance to get some clarification from them as to intended usage...  Alai 18:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

CAsia-geo-stub and
Now that every country in this region has its own geo-stub category, the reason for this one has gone. It was always a fairly arbitrary category, anyway, given the several different meanings of "Central Asia". The six nation-specific geo-stub categories it contains can readily be moved to the category. Deleting it would remove a redundant level of hierarchy from the stub tree. Grutness...wha?  05:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Upmerge to Asia geography stubs. Besides if we treated Asia the way we do Africa, this should have been AsiaC-geo-stub instead. Caerwine Caerwhine  04:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, the other way round, really. Africa is the anomaly, and it's only like that because SAfrica-geo-stub would have led to confusion. Grutness...wha?  07:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * upmerge/delete. no point keeping the template since everythings covered. the subcats can go in the main asia geo cat.  BL Lacertae -  kiss the lizard  01:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep pending working out WTF we're doing with its children, which are almost all undersized, unproposed, recreations of earlier deletions, and uncle Tom Cobbley. Alai 02:36, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Argentina-sport-stub & &rarr; Argentina-sport-bio-stub &
This has been brought to SFD before, because of being slightly undersized and not fitting into the normal heirarchy. The main reason it was kept was the desire to have a stub category for Argentine sportspeople. We now have other national sportspeople categories and enough Argentine sportspeople stubs to populate a category that follows the standard conventions, so I feel that it is time that we rename the template accordingly and place it on the stub list. Caerwine Caerwhine 18:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Rename and rescope, per nom. Alai 18:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as is. There are a lot of other things within this Stub category including stadiums (Estadios) and sports clubs. A stub category is as good as it helps its contributors to keep track of things, and not having a standarized hierarchy that doesn't fit the particular needs of that group. Mariano (t/c) 07:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * By a rough count, about 1/3 of this category would need to be restubbed elsewhere after the rescope. None of, , , or are overlarge.  While the last one  definitely needs a  to be created and possibly some additional country level ones (including an  if there are 60 such stubs, there is nothing here to indicate why Argentine sports should be an exception to the usual stub heirarchy.  One could argue in favor of extending the idea of a country specific all-sports stub to all countries, not that I am in favor of that, but an exception just for Argentina makes no sense. Caerwine Caerwhine  14:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, and restub its contents appropriately. All of the contents of this category can fit elsewhere without breaking the hierarchy, and anything that would be left wouldn't be enough to justify keeping the category around.  --fuzzy510 23:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

ag-stub, farm-stub, farming-stub, farms-stub (redirects)
All four are redirects to agri-stub which have been on the discovey page since November. Also there ia a agriculture-stub but since that is simply the full name, and it has extensive use, I added it to the redirect page rather than bringing it here. ag-stub has previously been to SFD, but SPUI recreated in April. I disagreed with its deletion then so rather than pointing it out for a speedy, I hope to convince people it should be kept. farms-stub has 0 uses and farming-stub has 1 use, so unless someone has been depopulating them, I think we can safely delete both. farm-stub has 9 uses, but 2 of those are for specific farms and thus I feel it might lead to confusion over its purpose. (I have added the approprite geo stubs, both for England oddly enough.)
 * Keep ag-stub as with a lowercase "g", "ag" is unambiguous and certainly far less cryptic than "BiH"!
 * Weak Keep farm-stub as while I have some concern that people might use it intending that it be a subtype of geo-stub, it is a minor one and the abbreviation seems to attract a reasonable amount of interest.
 * Weak Delete farming-stub It hasn't seen much use, but it is a reasonable and unambiguous alternative name, so if anyone thinks it should be kept, I won't complain.
 * Delete farms-stub besides being unused, we frown on using plural nouns in stub template names unless there is a good reason, and I can't think of one here. Caerwine Caerwhine 20:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


 * delete farms-stub and ag-stub. farm-stub is probably ok. not sure about farming-stub - it would be ok if it was used but its not. farms is plural so should go. "ag-stub" could mean silver stubs so it should probably go too.  BL Lacertae  -  kiss the lizard  23:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Silver stubs? Are you serious? What could a silver stub even be about, let alone why we would start using chemical symbols as part  of stub names?   I realize that it's common only in some dialects of English, but using ag as a shortcut for agriculture is part of mine and doesn't take a couple seconds for me to realize what it is like agri does. Caerwine Caerwhine  04:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * ag can also refer to Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Aargau, Agrigento, artificial gravity, antigens, attorney generals, etc. Probably best to get rid of it. - Nomadic1 23:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


 * After some thought, keep all of them. I cannot think of any good reason to delete any of them, except ag-stub. I supported keeping "ag" then, and I still support now, but at least I understand why you might want to delete it (it's kinda ambiguous). Given that farming is almost a perfect synonym for "agriculture", there's no reason in the world not to keep it as a redirect. The others? I guess they're perhaps misleading (farms themselves ARE slightly different than agriculture) but I think they ought to remain anyway. That's just my take. Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk? ) 06:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete the lot. They are all useless, farming-stub the less so - Nomadic1 11:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete ag- (ambiguity, and as a recreation of earlier deletion) and farms- (naming guidelines). Keep  other two.  Alai 16:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Category:Indian ethnicity stubs to Category:Ethnic group in India stubs

 * Proposal moved from CfD Road Wizard 06:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

"Indian ethnicity" is ambiguous, and could refer to ethnic groups in India, or to groups descending from those originally from India but now present in other countries. Proposal is to rename this category along the lines of Category:Ethnic groups in India and Category:Ethnic group in Africa stubs. Kurieeto 14:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Military by country stubs
The following Military by country stubs have been named in the format of "Nationality x". However, as per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories)#State-based topics, all military by country categories should be named "of country". These current category names are inconsistent with their parents, such as Category:Canadian military stubs within Category:Military of Canada, and are therefore proposed for renaming.

--Kurieeto 21:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Category:Canadian military stubs to Category:Military of Canada stubs
 * Category:Chinese military stubs to Category:Military of China stubs
 * Category:German military stubs to Category:Military of Germany stubs
 * Category:Russian military stubs to Category:Military of Russia stubs
 * Category:South African military stubs to Category:Military of South Africa stubs
 * Category:United Kingdom military stubs to Category:Military of the United Kingdom stubs
 * Category:United States military stubs to Category:Military of the United States stubs
 * Comment These are far from the only stub categories where the parent follows the X of N convention and the stubs follow a Nian X convention, which has been the usual convention for the stub categories. I don't particularly care which standard is followed, as long as a standard is followed. Caerwine Caerwhine  15:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I concur, in many cases just adding " stubs" to the name of the perm-parent would be awkward-sounding (and for the "American" categories, following them off the edge of a naming convention cliff). Consistency within the stubs is preferable to between stubs and perms, if it's a choice between one or the other.  Alai 22:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll have to agree as well. The names will be too ackward, so let's stick to the current names. Valentinian (talk) 20:48, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Regarding naming conventions for by country stub categories, should Naming conventions (categories) provide a brief explanatory note and link to WikiProject Stub sorting/Naming guidelines for further detail, or the other way around? Which page defers to which?  Also, does anyone have a quick link to discussions where it was decided that "-related stubs" did not belong in category titles? Thanks, Kurieeto 13:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Good question. I'd suggest the former, for much the same reason as above:  the stub categories are really their own "system", being in effect part of an implementation mechanism for a maintenance function, rather than part of the "categories as part of the content".  While a degree of consistency is no harm, given that the stub cats are populated from templates, it's not key that the names are memorable as such.  On -related stubs...  My recollection is that that process rumbled on for months, around about a year ago, but boy is it hard to trace back to the original discussion.  In theory it should be somewhere in the archives of WP:WSS/P, unless it just predates that being split from the unified "criteria" page.  Alai 16:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe it should be the latter, with all the category naming instructions centralized in one place. Mainly because categories are all part of the same Namespace.  Additionally, Naming conventions (categories) is offical policy, whereas WikiProject Stub sorting/Naming guidelines are guidelines.  I'm going to start a discussion regarding this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting/Naming guidelines, which is a more appropriate place. Kurieeto 14:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

(resetting indentation)
 * I think I'd prefer "Military of X" for categories and "Xian military" for the stubs, per the awkwardness and system-separate points above. This example seems a good demonstration that adding "stubs" to a category name by default – i.e. stub naming deferring to category naming by default – is as likely as not to yield awkward results. Regards, David Kernow 17:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

&
The categories and the associated templates were created earlier today, then their creator noticed our bureaucracy and blanked out the templates and posted on the proposals page. I've taken the templates (Jordan-stub & Jordan-geo-stub) and resurrected thenm and set them to feed into and  respectively for. I recommend that we keep the templates and if by the end of the week, if either has 60 stubs, redirect them back into the country specific stub categories. If not, keep the template, and delete the country specific stub category until we have the usual 60. Caerwine Caerwhine 14:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I've populated both as well as I can. Jordan-stub has over 60 articles, but Jordan-geo-stub does not (although it is fairly close).  I hope that helps.   Amalas   =^_^=  16:49, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as a full type, and jordan-geo- as an upmerged template;  delete .  Alai 17:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I have no strong opinion on the -geo, but the full type should definitely stay. It is above 70 now, so I'm very tempted to restore the link. Valentinian (talk) 22:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

"Jordan stubs" kept. "Jordan geography stubs" upmerged to "Middle East geography stubs" and deleted. --TheParanoidOne 14:44, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Category:Yemeni people stubs
Kept. Logged discussion here. --TheParanoidOne 15:18, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Fm-stub /
''Closing note: Fm-stub deleted; stub type kept. Mairi 04:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)''' never proposed, just been made. has two stubs and a nasty template name. delete unless it gets to threshhold - if it does rename the template to freemasonry-stub.  BL Lacertae -  kiss the lizard  00:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Note this is now at the proposal page (better late than never...) So hold off on it for now - it will definitely need renaming if kept, though. Grutness...wha?  01:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, perfectly valid. Ardenn  20:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Please only debate this template in one location. Let's continue at the proposal page. Valentinian (talk) 20:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * There have been no objections over the creation of the stub so long as it is renamed, so I have done so and removed the stub type for deletion template from the stub itself. I hope this isn't overstepping my bounds. Oz Lawyer  00:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Which I've latter reverted, as neither process has run 7 days. I'd be happy with this if there's indeed 30 stubs primarily notable in connection with Freemasonry, without a bio-stub fishing exercise, which seems less than clear at this point.  Alai 01:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete at this point. We can always revisit this issue later if we get a whole bunch of stubs on freemasonry in the future.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 14:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * There are a whole bunch of stubs on Freemasonry, they just hadn't been put in the category until now (there are 66 stubs in the category now, only two of which are biographical). <b style="color:black;">Oz</b> Lawyer  14:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me, keep. Alai 16:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Definitely rename to "freemasonry-stub" if kept. No opinion on its actual worth. — Jul. 3, '06 <tt> [16:22] < [ freak]&#124;[ talk] ></tt>


 * It seems like the creator has already moved it to Freemasonry-stub, and changed the old name to a redirect. Delete Fm-stub. Not sure about the worth of the other one, but at least it's big enough. Valentinian (talk) 21:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)