Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/Archive/2019/August

A clarification?
Hi folks - not a proposal so much as a clarification needed. I see we have two templates: NativeAmerican-politician-stub and NorthAm-native-bio-stub... surely one of these should be moved so that the naming is consistent. If so, which way? Grutness... wha?   14:03, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd retain "NorthAm-native-foo-stub" and move the other one to NorthAm-native-politician-stub. While "Native American" sounds better to me, it can also describe indigenous peoples all over North, Central and South America. The aforementioned stub templates both link to : anything to do with North American indigenous peoples should probably specify "North America" in its title. There's also NorthAm-native-stub and NorthAm-native-book-stub – but confusingly, also IndigenousAustralia-stub (although the category name is consistent with the NorthAm one). Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 13:31, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Makes sense - perhaps redirects at the other names? I too prefer the term Native American, but you're right that it could have a mor ambiguous scope. Grutness... wha?   14:26, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Template redirects are harmless, and they save having to change the stub tags on any of the articles. Thankfully they're upmerged templates, so there's no need to change the categories as well ... at least not yet. – Liveste (talk • edits) 02:07, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Eurovision song stubs
There are 500+ articles in (granted, I've added a lot in the past few days, but there are probably a lot more not catted here I'd guess). This would likely make up the bulk of the category but it's the kind of thing where the logical next step is upmerges/subcats by country easily. Gnomingstuff (talk) 15:34, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Buddhism stubs
There are 500+ articles at. I haven't checked subcategories, but it is evident that many, if not most, of the articles there would also fall under the stubs that I would like to propose. This sort of split would make categorization much easier and make the project less daunting for other users. --Invokingvajras (talk) 22:35, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Theravada-stub: 41+ articles
 * Mahayana-stub: 57+ articles
 * Tibetan-Buddhism-stub: 64+ articles
 * Buddhist-text-stub: 71+ articles
 * Buddhist-myth-stub: 29+ articles. An upmerge between Buddhism-stub and Asia-myth-stub would suffice here.
 * Support templates & cats for Tibetan-Buddhism-stub and Buddhist-text-stub; support upmerged templates for the rest, for now. Her Pegship (really?) 17:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

American Anglican bishop stubs
There are 600+ articles at ; I've been sorting them and think I can get to enough American bios from the stragglers, plus probably stuff in the various American religious biography stubs. Gnomingstuff (talk) 17:19, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Her Pegship (really?) 19:00, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Māori stubs
There are currently 405 articles at, and I propose the following split: Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 15:35, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Māori-bio-stub: manual count 164 articles (excluding mythological people). Not sure how to further split these yet.
 * Maori-myth-stub: presently upmerged, but PetScan shows 84 articles including those without the stub template. Will also respell as "Māori-myth-stub".
 * Support and Māori-bio-stub /, with redirects from Maori in each case. Her Pegship (really?) 19:43, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment: Well, these are all done, and with a lot more articles in each than I initially expected. Question: I was wondering about the Māori-bio-stubs category, which is . It's supposed to contain articles on individual Māori people, but others might mistake it as a category for everything about the Māori people – including their culture, history, language, subgroups, etc. – which would actually belong in the parent . Perhaps it might be better to move the bio-stubs category to instead? It'd be less confusing and still consistent with a lot of the subcats in . Thoughts? – Liveste (talk • edits) 14:45, 26 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I've commented on that at the speedy proposal... but if you're trying to figure out how best to split Maori bios when it becomes necessary, there are several large iwi (tribes) and iwi groups such as Ngapuhi, Tainui, Muriwhenua, and Ngai Tahu - it might be worth looking at splitting along those lines. Only problem is that many Maori identify with more than one iwi. Grutness... wha?   14:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Another possible split would be by century. I realise that there would be an overlap, but - because of the colonisation of NZ in the 19th century, there's a profound change in Maori history at that point. Perhaps Pre-1800/19th Century/20th Century/21st Century?Grutness... wha?   14:29, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I've listed at CfD, for renaming to . Please feel free to add your thoughts at the CfD entry here. Cheers again. – Liveste (talk • edits) 13:18, 1 September 2019 (UTC)