Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive/2018/April

Start dividing and its continent equivalents into countries as well
This is not exactly the request for a single stub, but rather multiple stubs. The reason for this is with only diving mountain stubs into continents, there are many more intricate stubs that are sub-cats of the geo-stub: countries, states, and even cities. If we could divide the mountains stubs into at least countries to start off with, that would allow for the "system" of mountain stubs to have many more pages, and therefore be a lot more productive (remember, my original request was at state level). I am by no means saying we should divide it into all of the continents in the world right away - I would probably start with some of the South America country categories that have a lot of pages in them.--SkyGazer 512 talk / contributions / subpages 13:50, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Suggestion: Can you get a count of maybe the top 10 countries that would have 60+ of the mountain-stub articles? Just curious about numbers, as the category isn't well populated (and I see the point of creating country-level sub-cats, but I'd like to see what their potential is). Pegship (talk) 19:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Peru would likely have over 100. I'm too lazy to look at every single article in it Category:Peru geography stubs, but from the first 45 (I'm excluding the first 8, as they are stub TEMPLATES), 12 of them were mountains, so using this logic, the whole new stub category would have roughly 130. Like I said, though, I just did the first 45, so it's not the most reliable test ever. I'm going to start looking into some of the other countries now.--SkyGazer 512 talk / contributions / subpages 19:57, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Peru is definitely viable; I ran a cross-section of and  and got 2,869 items...! then ran  and  and got 1,624 results. I can find some more numbers is you want to know which countries are in most need of the mountain stub categories, but obv South America is where to start! Pegship (talk) 00:04, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, wow. I only looked in the Peru geography stubs category, rather than all of its subcategories, which is likely why my result number was so much smaller. I guess now I'll just wait for a few days and see the opinions of other users.--SkyGazer 512 talk / contributions / subpages 00:11, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Alright. I've made a list here.
 * Category:Peru mountain stubs/Template:Peru-mountain-stub
 * Category:South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands mountain stubs/Template:SGSSI-mountain-stub
 * Category:Switzerland mountain stubs/Template:Switz-mountain-stub (definitely that one, I got a ton of results there!)
 * Category:Austria mountain stubs/Template:Austria-mountain-stub
 * Category:Germany mountain stubs/Template:Germany-mountain-stub
 * Category:Italy mountain stubs/Template:Italy-mountain-stub
 * Category:England mountain stubs/Template:England-mountain-stub
 * Category:South Korea mountain stubs/Template:ROK-mountain-stub


 * The following are not countries, but they are rather subdivisions of Antarctica. I decided the list them here because they had a crazy yield when I used PetScan:


 * Category:Graham Land mountain stubs/Template:GrahamLand-mountain-stub (26 results with level 0 depth and 469 results with level 1 depth)
 * Category:Ross Dependency mountain stubs/Template:Ross-mountain-stub (125 results with level 0 depth, 617 results with level 1 depth, and 1053 with level 2 depth)


 * --SkyGazer 512 talk / contributions / subpages 13:53, 23 April 2018 (UTC)


 * How does that sound, (I'm pinging you because you seem to be one of the few users who are very active in stub sorting)? It's been 5 days, so if you approve of this I'll go ahead and create these.--SkyGazer 512  talk / contributions / subpages 17:00, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. If no one else has a comment, I'd say proceed in good faith. Pegship (talk) 17:12, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Support, and I have a supplementary idea. Why not subdivide by mountain ranges?&thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 21:24, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

French actress stub

 * Hi, created this stub (France-actress-stub) without realising approval was needed. Believe splitting stubs between actors and actresses aids searches within the corresponding categories and also reduces the length and intrusiveness of the stub tag, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 14:41, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
 * You also created which with just 12 articles falls below the 60 minimum. However, I do see that it has potential for many more, considering that  has more than 600 articles. There is a big problem with  as it stands: it is not in any categories. Its parents would be     but one of those,, doesn't exist. We also don't have one that would be higher up, , which has been created twice and deleted twice. Whilst  exists, it is a redirect to . Since there are no other stub cats for actresses (and no non-redirecting templates that I can find) I think that, on the whole, both  and  should be sent to WP:CFD. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 16:34, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. My rationale is that there are many categories that differentiate between actors and actresses so it seems counterintuitive that the stubs don't. Am prepared to fill the parent categories including the red ones if they are created and create stubs for actresses of other nations. I'm not editing them while the cfd is hanging over them so if you want to nominate them i'll make my case there, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 20:21, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Stick with -actor- Distinguishing by nationality, type (voice, stage, etc.), and decade of birth is sufficient, I think, and "actor" is increasingly used in popular culture to indicate a thespian of any gender. Pegship (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
 * don't see what is wrong with actress; if it is on the way out we will end up using female actor which is less succinct and means the same thing, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 13:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Nothing "wrong" with it, and I mention its use in the vernacular only as an aside. My main point is that there are already enough distinctions in the stub types without adding gender as one of them. Pegship (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Gender seems an obvious distinction to make, as actor/actress articles immediately state actor or actress after the name and birth date, also to have seperate actor and actress stubs would reduce the length of the stub notice making it neater and more precise Atlantic306 (talk) 16:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * If this discussion was about cultural norms, that would be relevant. As a discussion about how Wikipedia stubs serve the purposes of Wikipedia editors, the question of aesthetic appearance or grammatical prevalence is not useful. Still Oppose. Pegship (talk) 17:09, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The cultural norm is standard practice as the stub already includes actor and actress, creating seperate stubs will aid searching and be more accurate. Gender is an obvious distinction in acting and should be reflected in the stub, your only argument that it is not needed has no basis or examples.Atlantic306 (talk) 13:59, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I've sent them to CFD, see Categories for discussion/Log/2018 May 5. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I've sent them to CFD, see Categories for discussion/Log/2018 May 5. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Washington (state) geography stub sub-cats
These templates have reached the 60+ threshold; speedy categories? Pegship (talk) 21:32, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * ClallamCountyWA-geo-stub -
 * SnohomishCountyWA-geo-stub -
 * ThurstonCountyWA-geo-stub -
 * OK. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 22:27, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Oberea stubs
Category:Lamiinae stubs is one of the biggest stub categories there is, containing almost 2,500 pages. We could sub-categorize a good 112 of these pages if we added Category:Oberea stubs as a subcategory, by putting Oberea-stub on all 112 of these pages. Can I create the stub template and category?--SkyGazer 512 talk / contributions / subpages 14:32, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Cautious support - it would need to be a sub-cat of, which in turn is a sub-cat of . Pegship (talk) 18:19, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't even realize that it was in the Saperdini tribe - that's good to know. In that case, yeah, I'll definitely add it to the Saperdini sub-cat if I create it.--SkyGazer 512 talk / contributions / subpages 22:25, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. Considering the category now has 295 pages in it, I think adding the new stub was pretty productive.--SkyGazer 512 talk / contributions / subpages 21:40, 9 April 2018 (UTC)